Transcript Highlights:

• We have the word equity right in our title, so we're like very much dinged.
• We have the word equity right in our title.
• We have the word equity right in our title, so we're like very much dinged.
• Administrators aren't publicly saying, 'I support equity, diversity measures.'
• Administrators aren't publicly saying, I support equity, diversity measures.

Summary: The Assembly Higher Education Committee held an oversight hearing on how federal actions are affecting California higher education, with opening remarks from the chair and members emphasizing the importance of state-federal shared governance and the need to protect access, affordability, and campus diversity. The first panel included leaders from the CSU, University of the Pacific, California Community Colleges, and UC, who described broad impacts from federal grant terminations, changes to student aid, loan limits, visa and immigration policy, and proposed reductions to research support. Testimony focused on the elimination of Grad PLUS loans, caps on Parent PLUS and Pell-related changes, the loss or suspension of hundreds of grants, and the resulting harm to student support services, research, workforce pipelines, food assistance, and health care training. UC and CSU representatives warned of major losses in research funding, indirect cost reimbursement, and student opportunities, while community college leaders highlighted uncertainty around federal grants and the need to maintain services for low-income, first-generation, undocumented, and other vulnerable students. Committee members asked how the state could respond, including through intersegmental partnerships, dual enrollment, transfer pathways, and support for basic needs and nutrition programs. Witnesses said California could help by sustaining financial aid, protecting minority-serving institution programs, and investing in research, housing, and workforce development. Several speakers stressed that federal changes were creating instability for students and campuses, and that the effects would likely be long-lasting, especially in health care, teaching, STEM, and social work pipelines. A second panel then focused on equitable access. The California Student Aid Commission described state efforts such as the $3.9 billion investment in aid programs, the Cal Grant system, the Dream Act, and possible reforms to better serve adult learners, foster youth, undocumented students, and students with dependents. The Los Angeles Community College District reported that federal cuts and policy shifts are discouraging students from applying for aid, threatening TRIO and MSI/HSI-funded services, and reducing support for basic needs, counseling, and workforce programs. The Association of Independent California Colleges and Universities and the CSU Academic Senate echoed concerns about FAFSA confusion, international student restrictions, grant losses, and the erosion of equity-focused programs. No formal votes or legislative actions were taken during the hearing; the committee primarily received testimony and discussed possible state responses.

Transcript Highlights:

• And this bill also generates equity.
• We need everything we can do to address equity.
• The DPC folks... to address equity.
• Commercial health plans make lofty claims about supporting health equity.
• In support of H-1130-S-763, an act relative to telehealth and digital equity for patients.

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The committee held a public hearing with testimony on several health care bills, with most of the discussion focused on primary care access, community health center reimbursement, midwifery and birth centers, telehealth, hospital-at-home, direct primary care, and trans-inclusive health care access. Chair Feeney and Chair Murphy opened by noting the large number of signups and asking testifiers to keep remarks brief because of time constraints. Legislators and witnesses repeatedly emphasized that Massachusetts’ primary care system is under strain and that federal policy changes and reimbursement gaps are worsening financial pressure on providers. On community health centers, Representative Blay, Senator Lovely, Michael Curry, Bethany Keeley, Jag Deep Trevetti, Sean Cahill, and Christina Severin all supported H. 1096/S. 711, which would require commercial insurers to pay federally qualified health centers at least the MassHealth prospective payment system rate. They argued that commercial plans currently reimburse health centers below Medicaid rates, threatening sustainability, staffing, and access, especially as federal cuts and coverage losses could increase uncompensated care. Testifiers said the bill would stabilize health centers, protect primary care access, and not cost the state money. A second major topic was H. 1117/S. 784 on sustaining birth centers and the midwifery workforce. Senator Lovely, Senator Miranda, Emily Anesta, Rebecca Orden, Catherine Rushworth, Nishira Burrill, Joel Sutherland, Rachel Blessington, Joelle Ward, and others described the 2024 maternal health omnibus as an important first step, but said birth centers and midwives still face low reimbursement, workforce shortages, and financial instability. They urged reimbursement parity, a workforce development fund, and support for freestanding birth centers, citing improved outcomes, lower C-section rates, better patient experience, and racial equity in maternal health. Several speakers shared personal birth stories and said the bill would help preserve and expand birth options in communities like Roxbury, Worcester, and the North Shore. The committee also heard support for H. 1343 on direct primary care from Dr. Garofalo, Dr. Altman, Dr. Nair, Stephanie Cameron, Dr. Haley Moke-Blessed, and others, who said current insurance rules force patients to use a separate in-network primary care doctor for referrals and sometimes prevent physicians from dispensing medications. They argued the bill would reduce delays, administrative burden, and costs while improving continuity of care. In addition, Dr. Miklides and Sue Stempeck supported H. 1141 on hospital-at-home parity, saying the model has strong outcomes and should be reimbursed at the same rate as brick-and-mortar hospital care. Heather Myers and Katrina Cook testified on telehealth and digital health equity, urging broader coverage for asynchronous care, remote monitoring, interpreter services, and digital literacy supports. SEIU Local 509 supported H. 1188/S. 681 on trans-inclusive health care access, saying it would remove arbitrary insurance barriers to gender-affirming care. No votes or committee actions were taken during the hearing.

Transcript Highlights:

• <00:15:42.280> bill,<00:15:42.600> I equity equity company in the bill, I equity equity
• private equities from owning. private equities from owning.
• In private equity companies' portfolios. In private equity companies' portfolios.
• and not assets for private equity firms. and not assets for private equity firms.
• private equity. private equity.

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• <00:05:15.840> Firm Park communities a private Equity Firm Park communities a private Equity
• She said she knows firsthand how damaging private equity is.
• She said she knows firsthand how damaging private equity is.
• firm for many years with private equity clients.
• She said the private equity model leaves residents suffering to survive.

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• This 15% of the fund goes to what is called the Cannabis Social Equity Fund.
• It's different than the social equity program I just talked about.
• of that social equity infrastructure in the cannabis industry.
• very similar to kind of the state's cannabis social equity fund.
• I'm also personally a social equity operator in the cannabis business space.

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The Special Joint Committee on Initiative Petitions held a public hearing on Initiative Petition 25-10, House Bill 5002, titled “An Act to Restore a Sensible Marijuana Policy,” which would repeal Massachusetts’ adult-use cannabis legalization framework. Chairs Brendan Crighton and Kate Hogan outlined the Article 48 initiative process and explained that the committee is gathering testimony for a report to the legislature. The hearing was organized into expert, proponent, opponent, and public testimony, with written testimony accepted through March 27. The first witness, Jessica Trow of MassBudget, testified in opposition to repeal and focused on cannabis-related revenue and social equity. She said legalization has generated nearly $2 billion statewide since adult-use sales began, with revenue flowing through the Marijuana Regulation Fund, the state sales tax, and local taxes and fees. She emphasized that funds support public health, the Cannabis Control Commission’s social equity work, the Cannabis Social Equity Fund, and municipal budgets, and argued that legalization has created pathways for communities harmed by prohibition. The petition’s spokesperson, Wendy Wakeman, argued in favor of repeal, saying legalization has worsened public health, safety, and quality of life, citing higher potency, addiction, youth use, impaired driving, workplace positives, and black-market concerns. Committee members questioned her about the data sources, the will of the voters, the role of paid signature gatherers, and the petition’s funding, including out-of-state and dark-money concerns. Opponents of the initiative then testified that repeal would harm a regulated industry that has created jobs, tax revenue, and social equity opportunities. Caroline Pino of STEM, Kristen Rogers of Levia, Judith Ledbetter of Project De-Stigmatized Healthcare, and Armani White of Firehouse Dispensary/EON described their businesses, community investments, and personal reliance on cannabis, and warned that repeal would push consumers back to the illicit market and undermine equity programs. In public testimony, Lucas Thayer of the Massachusetts Cannabis Reform Coalition and Jeff Rawson, a chemist and consumer protection advocate, also opposed the measure, arguing that regulated cannabis is safer than unregulated products and that repeal would damage investments and public safety. The hearing ended after the public testimony, and the committee voted to close the hearing.

Transcript Highlights:

• We also have equity.
• So what does it take for the General Assembly to maintain equity?
• I think it is easy to look at... ...and therefore equity can be achieved.
• I think it is easy to look at adequacy and equity as a pie.
• So equity is something that is measurable. It is comparable.

Summary: The meeting began with approval of the previous minutes and then focused on an update from the Department of Education on early childhood programs, especially the state-funded Arkansas Better Chance (ABC) program. Secretary Jacob Oliva and Deputy Commissioner Stacey Smith said Arkansas had received a federal Preschool Development Grant and described ongoing work to review ABC slots, which have been flat for years at about 23,800 slots and roughly $114 million. They said about 1,000 slots statewide are currently unfilled despite a waiting list of more than 2,000 families, and the department is shifting toward paying based on enrollment rather than guaranteed slots. Members asked about school choice, income eligibility, year-round access, curriculum flexibility, transportation, and whether funding should be increased or rebalanced; the department said it is collecting data, may survey providers more formally, and is considering whether to modernize income thresholds, daily rates, and other program rules. The committee agreed to form an early childhood subcommittee and asked the Bureau of Legislative Research to help gather historical information on income limits and other program details. The second major portion of the meeting was a legal presentation on the framework for Arkansas school adequacy by BLR education attorney Taylor Lloyd. She reviewed the constitutional basis for a “general, suitable, and efficient” public school system, the Dupree and Lake View cases, and the principle that adequacy and equity are different but related: adequacy asks what resources are needed, while equity asks whether those resources are distributed fairly. She explained that the General Assembly must define adequacy, study it, and react to evidence over time, and that the current adequacy definition includes curriculum and career/technical frameworks, the 38 mandatory Carnegie units, state testing standards, and sufficient funding. She also described the matrix as a funding tool, not a spending mandate, and noted that categorical funds are separate from the matrix. BLR’s Elizabeth Bynum then gave the historical framework, tracing legislative responses from Dupree through Lake View and into the present. She highlighted major changes such as the creation of equalization funding, fiscal distress and academic distress laws, the adequacy study process, the Educational Adequacy Fund, facilities and transportation changes, declining enrollment and student growth funding, and later adjustments to teacher salaries, isolated funding, and categorical programs. She explained that the adequacy study has evolved through committee hearings, surveys, site visits, and outside consultants, and that recent changes include updates to accountability references and the addition or removal of certain funding categories. Members asked follow-up questions about how the matrix is used, whether homeschool or private-school funding raises comparable issues, whether stakeholders include private and homeschool participants, whether school board members should be surveyed, and whether the state should revisit average daily membership versus attendance-based funding. No votes were taken on the adequacy presentations, but the committee did agree to continue the early childhood discussion in a future subcommittee meeting.

Transcript Highlights:

• I want to make clear the bill is not an attack on private equity generally in health care.
• But as private equity and health care has been growing in the health and dental sectors by fivefold,
• And this is what makes private equity different from any other corporate form.
• That's why this bill applies specifically to private equity.
• So I'm joined today by our support. and not in private equity firms.

Summary: The Assembly Business and Professions Committee heard several bills, including SB 788 by Senator Niello, which clarified that CPAs and CPA firms, including employees and out-of-state CPAs authorized to practice in California, are regulated by the California Board of Accountancy rather than subject to Tax Preparation Act registration requirements. Supporters said the bill would reduce duplicative regulation and confusion; there was no opposition, and the bill passed to Appropriations. The committee also heard SB 351 by Senator Cabaldon, aimed at strengthening enforcement of California’s corporate practice of medicine rules as they relate to private equity and hedge fund involvement in medical and dental practices. The author and physician supporters argued that private equity can interfere with clinical decisions and patient care, while opposition from the American Investment Council said the bill could sweep in legitimate business practices and requested a narrow amendment. The bill passed to Judiciary. SB 312 by Senator Umberg was heard next and would require health certificates for imported dogs sold in California to be submitted to CDFA and made publicly available, with supporters describing it as a transparency and consumer protection measure to combat puppy mills and misleading online sales. There was no opposition, and the bill passed to Agriculture. The committee also approved a consent calendar containing SB 291, SB 387, SB 517, SB 602, and SB 773, all moving to their respective committees. The meeting ended after additional roll calls and adjournment.

Transcript Highlights:

• In 2020, the legislature created the social equity and cannabis program.
• LCB accepted the first applications under the social equity program in 2023.
• Legalized cannabis eight years before creating a social equity program.
• equity among producer processor licenses will be limited.
• Decisions about the social equity program moving forward.

Summary: At the May 14, 2025 JLARC meeting, members approved the January 9 minutes and adopted the 2025–27 biennial work plan with a minor typo correction. Staff reviewed the new work plan studies, including a drug take-back program fee/expenditure review due in December 2025 and a state energy performance standard compliance review due in June 2027, and noted JLARC’s recent session activity, including several bills passed related to JLARC work and recommendations. The committee then heard a preliminary cannabis market study showing Washington businesses likely produced two to three times more cannabis than retailers sold in 2023. Staff and RAND said LCB’s data systems are incomplete and unreliable, limiting regulation, tax verification, and diversion tracking; they recommended that LCB submit a plan by year-end for collecting accurate data by the end of 2026. Members and LCB discussed the long timeline for a new traceability system, the causes of missing sales and weight data, overproduction, diversion, and the social equity program’s effect on producer licenses. JLARC also presented a preliminary hospital oversight report concluding that the Department of Health is late on many hospital inspections, does not verify third-party inspection standards, does not review adverse health event correction plans, and could make hospital data more accessible. The committee discussed fee funding, language access, and inspection timing, and DOH said it would work on a strategic plan and continue coordinating with JLARC. Members also heard a preliminary report on the public records survivor exemption, which found agencies are using it but need more guidance; JLARC recommended keeping the exemption and having the Attorney General provide additional training. Finally, the committee approved the DDA processes and staffing final report for distribution, which recommended performance metrics, stronger data quality controls, and workforce planning; DDA concurred. JLARC also introduced proposed study questions for a future DCYF juvenile rehabilitation review focused on safety, security, programs, staffing, education, and contraband, and the meeting adjourned after members asked about scope and facility conditions.

Transcript Highlights:

• We also have equity.
• So what does it take for the General Assembly to maintain equity?
• So what does it take for the General Assembly to maintain equity?
• I think it is easy to look at adequacy and equity as a pie.
• So equity is something that is measurable. It is comparable.

Summary: The meeting began with approval of the prior minutes and then shifted to an update from Department of Education Secretary Jacob Oliva and Deputy Commissioner Stacey Smith on early childhood education, especially the state-funded Arkansas Better Chance (ABC) program. They said Arkansas had received a federal Preschool Development Grant and described ABC as a large state program with about 23,800 funded slots and roughly $114 million in annual appropriations. Department officials said they are reviewing slot allocations because about 1,000 seats are funded but unfilled, while more than 2,000 families are on waiting lists, and they plan to reduce or reallocate slots from providers that have not filled them over several years. They also said they are examining whether income thresholds, curriculum expectations, daily rates, and summer programming should be updated, and members raised concerns about access, local control, transportation, and whether the program should better align with K-12 choice and school readiness goals. The committee agreed to form an early childhood subcommittee and asked the Bureau of Legislative Research to help gather historical data and other information for future discussion. The committee then received a legal presentation from BLR attorney Taylor Lloyd on the constitutional and statutory framework for education adequacy in Arkansas. She reviewed the Dupree and Lake View cases, explaining that the state must maintain a general, suitable, and efficient system of free public schools, and that adequacy and equity are distinct but related concepts. She emphasized that the General Assembly is responsible for defining adequacy, studying whether the system meets that standard, and reacting to the evidence, while the courts ultimately decide constitutional compliance. Lloyd also explained the current adequacy definition, the role of the matrix as a funding tool rather than a spending mandate, and the distinction between unrestricted foundation funding and restricted categorical funding. BLR’s Elizabeth Bynum followed with a historical overview of how Arkansas responded to the court cases and developed the current adequacy process. She traced major legislative actions from the 1980s through the Lake View litigation, including the creation of funding formulas, categorical aid, isolated funding, declining enrollment funding, and the 2003-2004 adequacy study that led to the Continuing Adequacy Evaluation Act and the matrix used to set foundation funding. She also described later changes to the adequacy statute, the financial reporting requirements for districts, and the ongoing use of surveys, stakeholder testimony, and consultant studies in the biennial adequacy process. Members asked questions about whether private or homeschool programs could use public funds for expenses like utilities, whether stakeholders should include those groups, the difference between average daily membership and attendance, and whether school board members are surveyed; staff said those issues would need further research or were outside the scope of the presenters’ role.

Transcript Highlights:

• This has manifested itself in the development of the CCC's social equity program and the Social Equity
• program and the Social Equity Trust Fund to fund the legislator created in 2022 to grant, to provide
• grants to prospective and active social equity licensees to help them achieve their goals. to provide
• businesses attempting to scale up and spread the immense costs of regulations. ...and social equity
• I see social equity entrepreneurs with delivery services, and I see the struggles that they're facing

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The House opened with the Pledge of Allegiance and welcomed students from the Frederick C. Murphy School in Weymouth, along with other guests introduced by members. The chamber then suspended Joint Rule 12 to allow several petitions to be referred, including proposals on alcohol labeling for beers consumed on premises, parity in funding for regional vocational and traditional public schools, and legal protections for victims of childhood sexual abuse. The main floor business was House No. 4187, An Act Modernizing the Commonwealth’s Cannabis Laws, reported by Ways and Means as a substitute bill. Members speaking in support described it as a comprehensive overhaul of the Cannabis Control Commission and the state’s cannabis and hemp regulatory framework. The bill would reduce and restructure the CCC, expand options for cannabis businesses and social equity operators, raise license and ownership caps, remove the vertical integration requirement for medical marijuana, and create stronger rules for hemp and CBD products, including a ban on unregulated intoxicating hemp products and a new regulatory structure for allowable hemp beverages and CBD items. Several amendments were offered and adopted by roll call, including changes narrowing the hemp beverage ban from 11 ounces to 7.5 ounces, requiring out-of-state testing labs to be certified in good standing with the commission, and other technical revisions. After debate, the House passed H. 4187 to be engrossed by a roll call vote of 153-0. The chamber also passed to be engrossed two sick leave bank bills, for Andrew Satara and Dana Johnson, and ordered House No. 1590, establishing a sick leave bank for Eric J. Wenaka, to a third reading. The House then adopted an order to meet the next day at 11 a.m. and adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• The next item is adds funding for salary equity increases.
• Starting back at the funding for the commissioner salary equity. Yeah.
• when it's not salary equity for the commissioner?
• It is—the request is— Additional equity.
• In equity, let's go to the rest of the increases, that salary equity increase that the Senate didn't

Keywords: 908, all

Summary: The committee took up Senate Bill 2025, the Veterans Home/Veterans Affairs budget, and worked through the long sheet line by line. Members discussed base payroll, salary and health insurance increases, FTE pool adjustments, IT rate increases, operating expenses, transportation grants, the PTSD service dog program, salary equity requests, temporary help/intern funding, a Veterans Benefit Specialist FTE, accrued leave, and several one-time or carryover items including the Fisher House, document scanning, and veterans medical transportation. The committee also reviewed proposed policy language that would shift governance authority for the Veterans Home and Department of Veterans Affairs from the Administrative Committee on Veterans Affairs to the governor, and would remove board authority over salary-setting and related hiring powers. A major portion of the meeting focused on clarifying the commissioner salary equity line and how the agency had shifted operating dollars to fund the commissioner’s current salary increase. After discussion with agency staff and Lonnie, the committee voted to remove the separate commissioner salary equity increase line and instead restore operating funding, ultimately setting the operating line at $50,000 above the prior amount rather than fully funding the executive request. The committee also approved funding for the Veterans Benefit Specialist FTE, approved a carryforward/exemption for accrued leave, approved authority to accept $200,000 in federal transportation grant funds, approved the $500,000 transfers related to veterans homelessness, and approved the exemption language for certain federal/state fiscal recovery funds after discussing whether the funds were properly obligated. On the governance amendment, members expressed concern about making a major policy change in an appropriations bill, but also frustration over the board’s salary actions. After debate, the committee adopted the amendment transferring governance authority to the governor by a 7-1 vote. The committee also approved a smaller amount for veteran service officer salary equity than requested, and rejected funding for temporary salaries and an intern. The chair then directed staff to prepare the amended bill for further action, with the committee planning to revisit it once the revised version was ready.

Transcript Highlights:

• Diversity, equity, and inclusion.
• ,<00:10:49.120> and classrooms. diversity, equity, and classrooms. diversity, equity, and
• for educational equity. for educational equity.
• , commitment to diversity, racial equity, commitment to diversity, racial equity, and<00:15:29.199
• ,<00:15:42.959> and publicly states diversity, equity, and publicly states diversity, equity

Keywords: 958, all

Summary: The subcommittee met without a quorum and did not approve minutes, but heard testimony on budget line items for Data Seam and Teach for America. Andrew McNeel of Kentucky Free and representatives from the Commonwealth Policy Center argued that both programs rely heavily on recurring taxpayer support and should be re-evaluated. McNeel cited a 2020 Office of Policy and Audit examination of Data Seam, saying the program had received more than $30 million in state support since 2006, including $3.5 million in the current budget, and that the audit raised concerns about administrative overhead, alleged threats to districts, and the use of line-item language to justify sole-source contracting. He recommended suspending Data Seam funding this biennium, directing a new special audit, and requiring reimbursement of audit costs. The witnesses also urged the committee to withhold funding for Teach for America, saying the organization’s materials and history showed a commitment to diversity, equity, and inclusion that they opposed. They pointed to past statements, leadership titles, and program language as evidence that DEI concepts remained embedded in the organization, and suggested any funding should be redirected directly to school districts instead. Mike Harmon and Richard Nelson echoed those concerns, while also saying long-running programs should be periodically reviewed for efficiency. Teach for America Appalachia representatives then testified in support of the program. Executive director C.D. Morton described the organization as a teacher-preparation and leadership-development program serving rural eastern Kentucky, saying it had recruited and supported more than 325 teachers since 2011, with about 30 current core members in several counties and roughly 2,800 students impacted daily. He said the program helps fill hard-to-staff vacancies, that about 80% of teachers stay for a third year, and that many alumni remain in education. In response to questions from Representative Bojanowski about retention and cost, Morton said more than 60% of alumni are still in education, but he could not give a precise classroom-teacher retention number beyond the program’s broader alumni data.

Transcript Highlights:

• And I know Assemblymember McKenner, you are also a champion for equity.
• Equity.
• I'm Shane England, director of the Digital Equity Los Angeles Coalition, or DELA, and the Digital Equity
• Also Digital Equity LA.
• Digital Equity Coalition in strong support.

Summary: The committee first heard AB 470, which would change California’s carrier-of-last-resort rules and allow a phased transition away from copper landlines in areas deemed well served by alternative phone options. The author and AT&T argued the bill would protect consumers, preserve 911 access, require public notice and CPUC review, and direct investment toward modern fiber and emergency communications. Supporters included a wide range of business, civic, tribal, and community groups, while opponents from TURN, rural counties, labor, digital equity organizations, and local governments warned the bill could let AT&T shed service obligations too quickly, weaken protections for rural and underserved households, and harm workers. After extensive member discussion about CPUC authority, rural carveouts, labor impacts, and reinvestment, AB 470 was passed do pass as amended to Appropriations, with one no vote and one not voting, and the roll left open. The committee then took up AB 1532, a committee omnibus bill extending funding and surcharge authority for the Deaf and Disabled Telecommunications Program and the TNC Access for All program, while also adding CPUC accountability provisions. Chair Boerner Horvath explained the bill would not raise consumer costs and would require the CPUC to appear at hearings when requested and adopt rules for commissioner attendance. There was no opposition testimony, and the bill was moved do pass and re-refer to Utilities and Energy, though the roll was left open because it had not yet reached the threshold for immediate transmission. Finally, the committee heard AB 353, the Affordable Home Internet Act of 2025, which would establish an affordability floor for home broadband for low-income Californians after the expiration of the federal Affordable Connectivity Program. Supporters said broadband costs remain too high and that families, students, and vulnerable communities need a state solution now; opponents from the wireless industry and rural county representatives argued the bill would amount to an artificial price mandate and could complicate existing rural broadband buildouts. Members generally supported the goal but raised concerns about impacts on small ISPs and rural areas, and the bill was moved forward with a motion and second while discussion continued about possible exemptions and amendments.

Transcript Highlights:

• lenses. the social Equity Provisions um that the social Equity Provisions um that we're<00:26:17.919
• haian uh to truly achieve social equity haian uh to truly achieve social equity in<00:27:38.120>
• particular native Hawaiian and Equity particular native Hawaiian and Equity entrepreneurs<00:29:
• for a lot of these social Equity for a lot of these social Equity entrepreneurs<00:29:54.120>
• There's also licenses that can be reserved for social equity applicants, and social equity grants can

Keywords: 910, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Equity equity as addressing at the word Equity equity as addressing the<00:38:59.119> health<00
• Health equity impacts all of us.
• Health equity impacts all of us.
• Health equity impacts all of us.
• Health equity impacts all of us.

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• <01:41:06.880> company notice to a private equity company notice to a private equity company
• private equity-owned private equity-owned homes<01:47:53.360> in<01:47:53.600> certain
• issue of uh these uh private equity issue of uh these uh private equity companies<02:03:40.360><
• my understanding of a private equity my understanding of a private equity company<02:09:59.640><
• private equity private equity funds,<02:23:04.640> private<02:23:04.880> equity<02

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• So what else can we do to ensure equity, but also access because we... can we do to ensure equity, but
• You know, you're always looking through that lens of equity.
• I wanted to address some of that in the equity of that.
• The other remaining equity is either going to be self-funded from our development company or from equity
• We now need to bring in the remaining equity injection, usually from private equity, and that's going

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:

• section of the Office of Health Equity.
• We are strongly opposed to the cuts with the Office of Health Equity, primarily the gender health equity
• Justice Fund and the LGBTQ Health Equity Initiative.
• We are strongly opposed to the cuts with the Office of Health Equity, primarily the gender health equity
• Justice Fund and the LGBTQ Health Equity Initiative.

Summary: The Assembly Budget Subcommittee on Health held an informational hearing on the Governor’s May Revision, focusing first on the Commission on Behavioral Health, then EMSA, and then the California Department of Public Health (CDPH). The Department of Finance said the state faces a third consecutive deficit and that the May Revision includes difficult trade-offs, including proposed eliminations or reversions of some behavioral health and public health funds. The LAO echoed concern about the structural deficit and said it was still awaiting some budget details before offering a full analysis. For the Commission on Behavioral Health, Finance proposed eliminating $20 million in Mental Health Wellness Act funds, arguing the money would help offset General Fund costs and noting future Proposition 1 innovation funding. The commission strongly opposed the cut, saying it would eliminate or delay launch-ready grants for early childhood supports, full-service partnerships, and peer respite, and would eventually end ongoing grant programming. Several advocates and commissioners testified that the funds support underserved communities and that Proposition 1 is not a substitute for the existing programs. The chair asked Finance to look for alternatives, but no vote was taken. EMSA presented mostly technical budget adjustments: increased authority for the California Poison Control System, a correction to EMSIS funding, and a reappropriation for enterprise services and data management. CDPH then reviewed a broader set of May Revision proposals, including reversions from the California Reducing Disparities Project, workforce development, STD prevention, hepatitis C prevention, hospice, and extreme heat funding, as well as a new generative AI pilot for health facility survey reporting. Members raised concerns about cuts to CRDP and gender health equity programs, especially because many grants are mid-contract and serve underserved communities; CDPH said the reversions were part of solving the deficit and that CRDP had been successful, while also clarifying that abortion.ca.gov would not be eliminated. Public comment was overwhelmingly opposed to the CRDP and related cuts, with many speakers describing the programs as life-saving and cost-effective. No formal votes or actions were taken during the hearing.

Transcript Highlights:

• Yeah, we work real closely with the Office of Equity.
• EDGE stands for Encouraged Diversity, Growth, and Equity.
• So increasing the number of firms is important in contracting equity.
• I'm the special assistant to Director Matthews at the Office of Equity.
• Equity is for everyone.

Summary: The committee heard a work session on voting access on tribal lands, beginning with a presentation from Dr. Chelsea Jones of the Brennan Center. She described barriers affecting Native voters and voters on tribal lands, including long travel distances to polling places and drop boxes, nontraditional addresses, unreliable postal service, language access, and limited broadband. Citing research, she said turnout on tribal lands trails turnout off tribal lands by about 10 percentage points nationally and about 10% in Washington, with larger gaps in some convenience voting measures. Members asked about the meaning of “lost votes,” the role of tribal leadership and community trust, and whether outreach by election officials and candidates could help; Dr. Jones emphasized that the study measured missed voting opportunities, not missing ballots, and that partnerships with trusted community leaders are important. The University of Washington Elections Database then presented data on voter registration, turnout, signature challenges, curing, and ballot rejection for voters whose addresses fall within tribal reservation boundaries. The presenters said registration on reservations increased from about 107,000 in 2010 to 137,000 in 2024, turnout on reservations remained about 8 to 9 percentage points lower than outside reservations in recent general elections, and signature-challenge and rejection rates were generally low but somewhat higher in off-year elections. They reported that about 60% to two-thirds of signature-challenged ballots are cured, with cure rates similar inside and outside reservations, and that late return is the most common reason for primary ballot rejection while signature mismatch is the leading cause in general elections. A question was raised about USPS postmarking issues and how those might affect future data; the presenters said they plan to track return method and cure timing more closely. The committee also received an overview of the Governor’s Office of Indian Affairs. Staff reviewed the office’s history, the Centennial Accord, the Millennium Agreement, and related state-tribal frameworks, and GOIA Director Tim Rainan described the office’s role as a bridge between the state and tribal governments, including consultation, policy coordination, training, and convening work groups. He said GOIA now has six positions, is part of the governor’s executive cabinet, and is working on a statewide tribal relations training module and consultation handbook. In response to a question, he said tribal voting is not a major topic at the Centennial Accord but is discussed more extensively through ATNI. The committee then shifted to contracting equity, hearing from WSDOT, DES, OMWBE, and the Office of Equity. WSDOT described its race-neutral small business and veteran goals, mentorship and support programs, and its response to the federal suspension of the DBE program; DES discussed statewide contracting spend, the EDGE pilot for small construction firms, and efforts to improve procurement access; OMWBE reported growth in certified firms and about $371 million in state spend with certified firms in the most recent year, while noting ongoing impacts from federal DBE changes; and the Office of Equity outlined its broader work on agency consultation, dashboards, and systems change. No votes were taken.

Transcript Highlights:

• I'm happy to start looking into how to replace private equity or what to do when we replace private equity-controlled
• What do we do about the private equity that is here?
• How do we stop future private equity from coming in?
• Another concern that I think is even more pressing is the private equity.
• On the comments related to private equity control of health care.