Transcript Highlights:

• I mean, it's weird because we all come in in some weird space, right?
• from safety and compliance issues, and most of all, it's about giving our students and educators a space
• from safety and compliance issues, and most of all, it's about giving our students and educators a space
• The bill, as amended, requires the issuance of a special license plate by the DMV to veterans of the Space
• The bill, as amended, requires the issuance of a special license plate by the DMV to veterans of the Space

Bills: AB49, AB93, AB108, AB169, AB188, AB212, AB221, AB224, AB251, AB282, AB284, AB296, AB304, AB331, AB356, AB366, AB375, AB409, AB467, AB475, AB476, AB479, AB494, AB514, AB515, AB533, AB542, AB550, AB558, AB567, AB568, AB571, AB581, AB583, AB584, AB585, AB595, AB596, AB597, SB170, SB427, SB460, SB508

Keywords: educational personnel, teacher licensing, reciprocal licensure, provisional teaching, school counselors, school nurses, school social workers, state education standards, public employees, police officers, benefits, appropriation, law enforcement, outdoor education, recreation, grant program, environment, funding, health insurance, speech-language pathology

Transcript Highlights:

• that are state beds from those that are the non-state hospital beds. to specify the beds that are child
• beds from adult beds.
• , we're adding. off the top of my head, I think 634 beds that are state beds.
• and then the adult beds. beds and their thoughts of how they're going to roll those beds, which was
• Austin State Hospital had fiscal space, but not in enough staff to open beds. I feel helpless.

Bills: SB500, SB719, SB912, SB1232, SB1467, SB1777, SB1864, SB2023, SB2119, SB2458

Keywords: SB 500, Texas adoption law, Family Code, DFPS, Department of Family and Protective Services, child-placing agency, prospective adoptive parents, adoption records, confidential information, nondisclosure agreement, child history report, health history, social history, educational history, genetic history, termination of parental rights, permanency plan, single source continuum contractor, privacy, redaction

Transcript Highlights:

• We are not adding any bed space.
• , so there is a space addition but not any new beds.
• We are not adding any<01:25:38.920> bed<01:25:39.160> space.
• any bed space. any bed space.
• addition but not any there is a space addition but not any new<01:25:51.560> beds.

Bills: HF4094, HF3390, HF3813, HF3583, HF3751, HF4324, HF4789, HF3596, HF4033, HF4424, HF4053

Keywords: Crosby, local sales tax, bonding authority, community projects, voter approval, Owatonna, use tax, special law, community center, municipal finance, capital project, sales and use tax, local option tax, city tax, public facility, general election, bond referendum, debt limit, levy limit, Minnesota local government

Transcript Highlights:

• We appreciate the space and place to be here with you and in this conversation.
• I know that we can license three-bed homes, five-bed homes, and up to six-bed homes, but it's a statutory
• Five-bed homes and up to six-bed homes, but it's a statutory terminology.
• They have the most psychiatric residential treatment facility beds.
• But that it still does sometimes happen because the space—this space is incredibly complex in terms of

Keywords: 907, all

Transcript Highlights:

• And it's not just a bed.
• You funded 5,600 dorm beds. There are 400 apiece. There are 400 dorm beds each.
• space use.
• The other $15 million is one-time funding with the goal of increasing actual detention bed space by 32
• And over the From that became a one 500 bed unit. And then now, and then two 100-bed units.

Keywords: 1184, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Um, 220,000 square feet, 175 beds.
• to 1423 beds per facility.
• , that's what the VA calls bed hold.
• But those two facilities, that's 302 beds at Claremore, 301 beds at Norman.
• It is a 52-bed facility.

Keywords: 914, all

Transcript Highlights:

• They're obviously going to need better room, dorm space, and that sort of thing.
• 38 new beds. So those people will not be going to Jamestown. They'll be staying in Bismarck.
• It actually said, you've got plenty of beds, but you're doing it the wrong way.
• It brings it up to $6 million for space, for rent, moving, and space reconfiguration. Okay.
• It brings it up to $6 million for space, for rent, moving, and space reconfiguration. Okay.

Bills: SB2012

Keywords: transportation, funding, infrastructure, grants, municipal, 908, all

Summary: The Government Operations division met to consider House Bill 1015, the OMB budget, with several amendments already in hand. A major portion of the discussion centered on Senator Mathern’s concerns about the proposed new state hospital in Jamestown. He argued the project is outdated, too expensive, and should be delayed or reduced in favor of local behavioral health services and deferred maintenance at the existing LaHogue facility. Other members questioned him about staffing, capacity, constitutional issues, and the relationship between the hospital proposal and broader mental health investments in other bills. The committee also reviewed budget mechanics, including the transfer of up to $240 million from the Social Services Fund to the Human Services Finance Fund, a $40 million deferred maintenance fund, a $3 million deficiency appropriation for the new and vacant FTE pool, and other OMB-related items. Members discussed whether OMB should have managerial control over the Jamestown project and generally agreed that OMB oversight could help manage costs, though concerns about the hospital remained. The committee then considered two funding items that drew the most debate: guardianship grants and a pro-life education campaign. After testimony from a representative supporting the campaign, members agreed to reduce that item by $500,000 and add $1 million for guardianship grants, while leaving the overall bill to be finalized in conference. The committee adopted Amendment Version 2006 with those changes and then passed HB 1015 as amended on a roll call vote, with all members voting aye except Senator Burckhard on the amendment vote; he later voted aye on the bill itself. The chair indicated the bill would move to conference committee.

Transcript Highlights:

• So there's no bed space available.
• <00:14:19.800> space availability so there's no bed space availability so there's no bed space
• though we have a a space available able a<00:14:59.399> bed<00:14:59.600> available<00
• admitting one because we had one space admitting one because we had one space and<00:15:11.240><
• It gave him space to breathe and, most importantly, it gave him space to process his trauma.

Keywords: 910, house, all

Summary: The Committee on Health heard testimony on several bills. On SB 1441, which would repeal the transfer of the Oahu Regional Health Care System from HHSC to the Department of Health, the Department of Health said it strongly supports the measure and requested clarifying amendments. HHSC/Oahu Region also supported the bill and said it had no objection to the department’s amendments. In response to questions, witnesses said the agencies have been working on an MOU to support transfers of long-term care patients to Leahi, with the current goal being about 10 to 15 patients, but transfers would occur only as space and staffing allow; one patient was reportedly being admitted at the time, and the process was described as slow and case-by-case. The committee then heard SB 1443 on payment rates for state hospital patients and related Department of Health services. The hospital administrator said the bill would allow rates above Medicaid for community or foster-home placements if patients cannot be placed at Leahi or elsewhere, and would set Medicaid-level reimbursement for outside medical services used by state hospital patients. He said at least one provider was interested in offering services at that rate and that the population involved is largely non-ambulatory long-term care patients. Members asked about availability and training, and the witness said special training could be provided. SB 1322, a broad mental health bill, drew mixed testimony. The Department of Law Enforcement supported giving crisis-intervention-trained officers more discretion to transport people to medical care instead of arresting them. The Attorney General supported the bill but recommended revisions to emergency-transport language and restoring liability protections. HHSC and Queens Hospital supported the overall goal but sought amendments to preserve the mental health emergency worker role in decision-making and to avoid negative impacts on emergency departments. The Disability Rights Center and ACLU opposed parts of the bill, arguing that it weakens due process, reduces protections in involuntary treatment and transport, and should retain a three-person treatment panel rather than reduce it to one. A Queens representative said the current program works well and reported that more than 90% of MH1 cases once went to hospitals, but that figure has dropped to about 60-70%, with about 20% now diverted to community settings or the behavioral health crisis center. No votes or final committee actions were taken in the portion provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• The center provides a safe, stigma-free space.
• We have about 20 beds for adolescents and children.
• We have about 20 beds for adolescents and children.
• We have over 2,000 staff, over 900 patient beds.
• It's going to increase our inpatient capacity to 48 beds.

Summary: The hearing focused on youth mental health and treatment access in California, with opening remarks emphasizing that youth distress, self-harm-related emergency visits, and difficulty obtaining care remain elevated, while workforce shortages and reliance on one-time funding continue to limit access. Assemblymember Lori Davies echoed concerns about unstable funding and said lawmakers need to hear directly from providers and families as they prepare for the budget and legislation. The chair framed the hearing as a chance to hear from county, school, provider, and student perspectives, especially in San Diego County, where needs are high and investments have not always matched demand. County and school officials described the current system and recent state initiatives, including the Children and Youth Behavioral Health Initiative, school-linked fee schedules, payment reform, and the Behavioral Health Services Act transition. San Diego County Behavioral Health said it serves Medi-Cal youth with specialty mental health needs through a broad continuum of care, including outpatient clinics, school-based services, crisis response, residential treatment, and new crisis and residential facilities. San Diego County Office of Education and San Marcos Unified School District described efforts to expand school-based services and reimbursement through CYBHI, but said implementation is slowed by complex billing rules, insurance-data collection concerns from families, administrative burden, and uncertainty about sustaining staff positions funded by grants or soft money. School counselor testimony highlighted reduced stigma through campus outreach and clubs, but also noted that counselor-to-student ratios remain well above national standards and that budget cuts threaten supports. Provider testimony stressed that the system remains fragmented and that youth often move between emergency rooms, inpatient care, outpatient therapy, schools, and county programs without smooth handoffs. A child psychiatrist described crisis cases in which the main choices are brief hospitalization or discharge with limited follow-up, and argued for stronger warm handoffs, more outpatient and intensive outpatient options, better school-clinic coordination, and broader use of mobile crisis and 988. Rady Children’s Hospital and Aurora Behavioral Health described large increases in behavioral health demand, expansion of integrated care, and major barriers tied to low reimbursement rates, delayed payments, and administrative complexity. Across the panel, witnesses called for more stable funding, clearer reimbursement rules, better parent education on warning signs, and stronger collaboration among schools, counties, hospitals, and community providers to reduce stigma and improve timely care for youth.

Transcript Highlights:

• So we're asking for new lab space. We're not getting rid of our old lab space.
• , could be our civil bed, it just depends.
• Typically, we're probably paying around $805 a day for those bed days.
• We are basically out of money in March on paying for beds at this point.
• , the brick and mortar beds at that facility.

Keywords: 1184, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• We're up to 131, with four applications for the one open bed, so we're predicting here by the end of
• Our facility overview: our annex building holds five units, 59 beds.
• So each room has a bed, and it also has a sitting area.
• So the Hoyer will bring them straight from bed to the toilet. So this is kind of fun.
• I'm getting old; I think I'll beat you to the bed there. Yes, but yes, we do.

Transcript Highlights:

• And so we anticipate funding over 7,000 beds across California, with more than 3,000 of these beds created
• And a 2022 RAND study looked at the need statewide, found, I think, it was 7,800 beds.
• And a 2022 RAND study looked at the need statewide, found, I think, it was 7,800 beds.
• So... ...the need statewide, found, I think, it was 7,800 beds.
• where they receive clinical services. their schools, their communities, and their healthcare spaces

Summary: The hearing opened with remarks from the chair and members about recent federal cuts to public health, mental health, family planning, and Title X funding, with strong concern about the impact on California programs and providers. The committee then turned to the Department of State Hospitals, which presented its 2025-26 budget proposal of $3.4 billion, including new positions, capital improvements, and funding tied to increased patient costs and incompetent-to-stand-trial services. DSH reported major progress in reducing the IST waitlist and wait times, said it had met the court’s 28-day treatment benchmark for those without extenuating circumstances, and described workforce recruitment and retention efforts such as residency programs, fellowships, outreach, and hiring streamlining. Members asked about future IST referral trends, SB 1323’s effect on diversion and community treatment, and workforce lessons in high-cost regions; public comment urged reconsideration of county IST growth cap methodology in light of new criminal justice initiatives. The committee next received an informational overview of Proposition 1 and its changes to behavioral health funding and governance. The Legislative Analyst’s Office explained that Prop. 1 restructured county MHSA funding buckets, expanded the Commission for Behavioral Health, shifted prevention and early intervention responsibilities, and authorized a $6.4 billion bond, including $4.4 billion for behavioral health facilities through BHCIP. DHCS said it had released guidance for county integrated plans and was receiving extensive public comment. Members focused on BHCIP application requirements, especially letters of support and tribal projects, and raised concerns about whether DHCS’s implementation matched statutory intent. DHCS said it had authority to set application requirements and that tribal entities were treated differently because of sovereignty and funding structure. DHCS then updated the committee on BHCIP, the Behavioral Health Bridge Housing Program, and related bond implementation. The department said BHCIP had awarded about $1.7 billion across five rounds, with more than 130 projects and 223 distinct facilities funded, and that it was preparing to award the new bond funds after receiving nearly $8 billion in applications. The LAO’s assessment found that more than half of awards served at least 80% Medi-Cal enrollees, but also raised concerns that the regional allocation model could reinforce inequities, that the program had not sufficiently addressed the highest-need regions such as the southern San Joaquin Valley, and that smaller counties and less launch-ready applicants faced barriers. For bridge housing, DHCS said more than $1.1 billion had been awarded, serving over 5,000 people and supporting more than 2,000 operational beds, but the Governor’s budget proposes to eliminate Round 4 funding as the administration weighs other statewide investments and Proposition 1 implementation workload. Public commenters and members urged more accountability, better regional equity, stronger labor and community involvement, and caution about funding for for-profit psychiatric facilities. Finally, the committee heard on the Children and Youth Behavioral Health Initiative. CalHHS and DHCS described CYBHI as a broad prevention- and equity-focused effort with more than 1,300 organizations funded, over $2.1 billion awarded, and multiple work streams spanning schools, community programs, workforce, and digital supports. DHCS highlighted school-based services, the fee schedule rollout, and digital platforms BrightLife Kids and Soluna, which it said are reaching users statewide and providing low-barrier access to coaching and support. Members and public commenters raised concerns about delays in school fee schedule implementation, the large share of funding going to digital tools, the need for more in-person services, and whether the initiative is sufficiently tracking outcomes and equity impacts. No formal votes were taken during the hearing.

Transcript Highlights:

• It’s an act relative to bed bugs.
• When you have bed bugs, you then worry every night after that.
• I visited this one motel in my district, and there was no green space, no play space, and children were
• In those 50 years, we preserved a lot of open space.
• to understand that these are shared spaces.

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The Joint Committee on Housing heard testimony on several housing bills, with much of the discussion focused on seasonal communities and funding for year-round housing in places like Martha’s Vineyard, Nantucket, Cape Cod, and the Berkshires. Speakers supported bills including H. 4410/S. 966 and related seasonal communities legislation, which would allow local option real estate transfer fees and expand tools for towns to preserve and create affordable housing. Testimony emphasized severe housing shortages, high home prices, workforce displacement, and impacts on public safety, schools, health care, and local businesses. Many witnesses said the transfer fee would provide a sustainable local revenue stream, citing prior land bank models on Nantucket and Martha’s Vineyard as proof the approach can work. The committee also heard testimony on H. 3989 regarding seasonal community designation, with supporters arguing that towns should be included automatically or through a simpler opt-in process, and on H. 4568 to expand the Family Self-Sufficiency Program, which would broaden access to a federal voucher-based savings and self-sufficiency model. Senator Edwards testified in support of a bill to create training for municipal board members, describing it as a toolkit to improve informed local decision-making. Senator O’Connor testified for a bed bug bill, saying it would create clearer landlord and tenant notification and treatment requirements and provide needed legal guidance after his family’s experience with an infestation. Senator Lovely also testified for the Homeworks program, which provides transportation so homeless children in motels and shelters can attend after-school activities. The committee further heard testimony on a bill to fund housing in seasonal communities through a transfer fee and on a companion measure to expand the seasonal communities toolkit, with repeated calls for favorable reports. Witnesses from public safety, health care, housing nonprofits, schools, and local government described staffing shortages and housing insecurity as urgent problems. Later, the committee took testimony on H. 1559/S. 102 to maintain stable housing for families with pets, with animal welfare groups supporting protections against eviction, breed discrimination, and excessive pet rent. They said housing-related pet surrenders are a major driver of shelter intake. The hearing also included testimony on H. 1498 to limit criminalization of homelessness, which would restrict citations, fines, and related consequences for outdoor camping tied solely to homelessness.

Transcript Highlights:

• And again, I've spent 30 years in this space advocating with passion, as you all are here today.
• In this space advocating with passion, as you all are here today.
• I mean, it was the spectrum of people that are in this space.
• Space.
• is available and within 500 feet of a school, open space, or major transit stop.

Summary: The committee first heard AB 1157, the Affordable Rent Act, which would lower California’s annual rent cap, remove the single-family home exemption, and eliminate the sunset on existing tenant protections. The author and supporters argued that renters are facing severe affordability pressures, especially in single-family rentals, and that stronger statewide rent stabilization is needed to prevent displacement and homelessness. Opponents, including apartment, building, and property-owner groups, said the bill would discourage housing production, harm small landlords, and override a deal they said was intended to be temporary while the state focused on building more housing. Public testimony on AB 1157 was extensive, with many renters, tenant advocates, labor groups, and community organizations speaking in support, while many landlords, business groups, and property-owner representatives spoke in opposition. Committee members were split: some praised the bill as a necessary response to the rent crisis, while others warned it could reduce investment and worsen the housing shortage. The committee ultimately voted 7-5 to pass AB 1157 to the Assembly Judiciary Committee. The committee then approved the consent calendar, including AB 413, AB 1152, and AB 1275, on a 9-0 vote. It also heard ACA 3, which would require the University of California to make available a limited number of down payment loans for eligible long-term support staff who are first-time homebuyers. Supporters said the measure would help lower-wage UC workers afford homeownership and improve retention, while UC and other opponents argued the proposal was duplicative of existing state programs, unnecessary, and potentially harmful to UC finances. The discussion focused on financing mechanics and the relationship to CalHFA, but no final vote on ACA 3 was included in the portion provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• health hospital beds.
• health hospital beds.
• So now the counties are upset that we as a state don’t have the capacity to commit and have bed space
• So now the counties are upset that we as a state don’t have the capacity to commit and have bed space
• So now the counties are upset that we as a state don’t have the capacity to commit and have bed space

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• there is a mechanism by which these beds there is a mechanism by which these beds could<00:06:30.000
• acute setting also frees up those beds acute setting also frees up those beds for<00:12:52.480><
• is quite a lot more expensive per bed is quite a lot more expensive per bed day<00:12:59.920>
• the two bed um if the bill were to be the two bed um if the bill were to be expanded<00:15:33.120>
• How many beds do you have?

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Page 6 shows the types of state-supportable spaces at UC and CSU and the types of spaces at the colleges
• More than half of space is designated as offices or other types of spaces for all of the segments.
• Other campuses are underutilizing their space.
• And the average cost of buying the hospital, buying the beds, was about half a million dollars a bed.
• Instructional space, including classrooms and labs.

Summary: The committee’s first major discussion focused on higher education facilities across UC, CSU, and the community colleges, with Chair Alvarez framing the issue as a final budget hearing before the May Revise. The LAO presented findings that campuses have grown substantially in buildings and square footage, while classroom and lab utilization remains below legislative standards and deferred maintenance backlogs continue to rise. The LAO also emphasized that the state and segments lack comprehensive data on capital renewal spending and recommended better reporting, clearer funding targets, and long-term planning for renewal and maintenance. UC, CSU, and community college representatives each described large five-year capital plans, aging facilities, seismic and deferred maintenance needs, and the role of student housing, while noting that construction costs are rising faster than inflation. Members questioned the segments about debt service, utilization rates, and how projects are prioritized. UC said its debt service tied to state support is about $665 million annually and described a $30 billion five-year capital financial plan, including housing, medical centers, and building renewal. CSU said it has about $31 billion in five-year needs and more than $8 billion in deferred maintenance, with funding coming from a mix of state-related and one-time sources since the state shifted capital responsibility to CSU. Community colleges said their unmet facilities needs total about $33.5 billion and explained their use of a scoring matrix and FUSION system to rank projects. The chair and members pressed all three systems to better distinguish between projects that are truly shovel-ready and those that are long-term needs, and discussed whether facilities condition data, total cost of ownership, and more standardized metrics should guide future bond proposals. The committee then turned to Proposition 2 and the Governor’s proposed community college capital outlay projects. The Department of Finance said Prop. 2 provides $1.5 billion for community colleges and that the Governor’s budget proposes 29 projects, with two continuing Prop. 51 projects also included. The LAO supported the overall use of the funds but raised concerns about the current 65/35 split between modernization and growth, the unusually large share of gymnasium projects, and some scoring metrics that favor larger campuses and certain regions. Community college officials said the scoring system was developed through participatory governance and would take one to two years to revise, but they supported the funding and agreed to follow up on questions about project categories and the rationale for the weighting. Members also suggested giving more weight to modernization, regional access, and intersegmental or collaborative projects. A final item addressed the CalKids program. The Department of Finance proposed $56,000 ongoing General Fund for three positions, while the LAO recommended approving two positions but rejecting a manager position until the current $7.5 million marketing campaign is evaluated. ScholarShare’s executive director said CalKids has enrolled more than 5 million children, with nearly 600,000 claims and over $45 million distributed, and argued that additional staff and outreach are needed to reach a goal of 1 million claimed scholarships by the end of 2025 and to implement AB 2808. Members asked about marketing effectiveness, data sharing, and eligibility rules, and the program said it is expanding partnerships with Cradle to Career and CSAC. No final vote was taken in the hearing, and the chair indicated the facilities item would be held open.

Transcript Highlights:

• <00:04:28.919> but children in an ER or in a bed but children in an ER or in a bed but referring
• Our county social worker applied to a shelter in the cities, but there wasn't a bed.
• part of that too is is the lack of beds part of that too is is the lack of beds and<00:35:48.440
• into an 18 non-security detention space into an 18 bed<01:00:17.480> prtf<01:00:18.039> to
• <01:19:39.120> where available psychiatric bed where available psychiatric bed where appropriate

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• So is that per patient per bed? Is that how that's contracted?
• Is it just a flat rate per patient per bed? Yes, ma'am.
• Is it just a flat rate per patient per bed? Yes, ma'am.
• Those hospitals have no inpatient beds.
• Long-term acute care hospitals—we call them LTACs in my space.

Summary: The subcommittee met to review Department of Human Services hospital payments in Arkansas Medicaid, with DHS Secretary Janet Mann and Deputy Secretary Misty Eubanks presenting first, followed by Arkansas Hospital Association Executive Vice President Jody Ann Tritt and a brief comment from Arkansas Children’s. DHS outlined the main hospital payment streams: fee-for-service per diem payments, upper payment limit (UPL) supplemental payments, cost settlements, and smaller payments such as graduate medical education and disproportionate share hospital funds. Members asked for plain-language explanations of cost settlements, why per diem rates vary by hospital type, and why UPL applies to private hospitals. DHS said cost settlements and UPL are mechanisms to help offset Medicaid underpayment, with SFY 2025 hospital payments totaling hundreds of millions of dollars and no general revenue used for supplemental payments beyond the state share funded through hospital assessments and related financing structures. Committee members focused heavily on whether Arkansas hospitals are adequately reimbursed and why rural hospitals struggle. Tritt explained that critical access hospitals, rural emergency hospitals, PPS hospitals, and specialty hospitals operate under different federal and state rules, and said lower per diem rates for some facilities help with cash flow and later cost settlement adjustments. She said Arkansas hospitals are under financial strain, citing a negative patient services margin statewide and noting that Medicaid, Medicare, and commercial payers all contribute to the problem. She also said the association had just authorized a statewide survey of hospital finances and costs, which she expected would take about a year to complete. A major theme was commercial insurance reimbursement. Tritt argued Arkansas hospitals are paid far less than hospitals in neighboring states even though premiums are similar, and said administrative burdens, prior authorizations, and denials add to the problem. She said hospitals receive about 52 to 53 cents on the dollar for Medicaid costs without UPL and about 78 cents with UPL, still below cost. Members also discussed Medicare wage index issues, Medicare Advantage, and whether hospitals could use technology or alternative arrangements to improve finances. No votes were taken on the hospital presentation. At the end of the meeting, DHS provided a brief update on Living Choices and assisted living reimbursement. Officials said one assisted living facility, Pillars of the Community in Crossett, had announced closure, with nine waiver clients being transitioned to other settings. DHS said the current cost reporting period was underway and that a new rate study could be ready for review before the end of the fiscal year if reports were submitted on time. Members also asked about the broader waiver plan, and DHS said the next waiver iteration would likely be brought back to the committee in the summer.

Transcript Highlights:

• All the space. Well, there's 12 members on the committee.
• Similarly, the website shares, I think, not the full story when it comes to shelter beds.
• Similarly, the website shares, I think, not the full story when it comes to shelter beds.
• Prior to HAP, we had about 1,000 beds in my city.
• And so as our ordinance says, ...there is a shelter bed available.

Summary: The Assembly Budget Subcommittee on Accountability and Oversight held a hearing on California’s homelessness funding, focusing on the Homeless Housing Assistance and Prevention (HAP) Grant and the Encampment Resolution Grant Program. HCD described new accountability requirements, including regional action plans, stronger reporting and expenditure conditions, housing-element compliance, encampment response plans, and public dashboards that track fiscal spending, service outcomes, and encampment resolution status. Officials said the goal is to use the data to identify underperforming grantees, provide technical assistance, and, if needed, withhold or reallocate funds. Local officials from San Diego, Fresno, and Santa Cruz said the programs have helped expand shelter, outreach, and permanent housing, and that state dollars have leveraged local and federal resources. Mayor Todd Gloria said San Diego has used HAP to expand shelter and safe sleeping options, reduce downtown encampments, and increase housing production, but argued the state’s new accountability website is too high-level and does not fully reflect countywide conditions, behavioral health outcomes, or the role of continuum-of-care partners. Fresno officials said HAP and other state funds helped the city add shelter beds and reduce homelessness, while Santa Cruz emphasized that state funding helped build local coordination and draw in federal vouchers. Members pressed the panel on whether HAP is actually reducing homelessness, what the best success metrics should be, and whether the state is getting full, usable data from grantees and subcontractors. Several members asked for more granular jurisdiction-level reporting, better tracking of nonprofit spending, and clearer measures beyond point-in-time counts and “people served.” HCD said it is still improving HMIS participation and data quality, but can already show outcomes such as exits to permanent housing and returns to homelessness. The hearing ended with broad agreement that transparency is important, but disagreement remained over the best measures of success and how much emphasis should be placed on housing, prevention, shelter, and treatment.