Transcript Highlights:

• So a contractor, um, things run over expenses, right?
• The subcontractor has the payroll expenses. They've got the insurance expenses.
• They've got the workers' compensation expenses.
• So how could a subcontractor be expected to handle all of those expenses on a weekly or monthly expense
• My payroll and material expenses or by any other means.

Committees: House Economic Development , House Joint Committee on Rural Economic Development

Transcript Highlights:

• Object code is your personnel services, operating expenses, expenses, that type of organization.
• Object code is your personnel services, operating expenses, expenses, that type of organization.
• So what you will see in our budget, we are mandated to pay some technology expenses, facility expenses
• Do you need to share Medicaid expenses with us?
• We would then improve that expense to the county.

Committee: Senate Community Affairs

Summary: The Committee on Community Affairs convened with a quorum and took up SB 308, a bill related to the Florida Museum of Black History. The bill would establish a Florida Museum of Black History Board of Directors and direct it to work with a supporting nonprofit foundation, while also requiring the St. Johns County Board of County Commissioners to provide administrative assistance and staffing until planning, design, and engineering are complete. With no appearance forms or debate, the committee voted the bill favorably. The remainder of the meeting was an informational briefing from the Florida Association of Counties and the Florida League of Cities on local government budgeting practices. Presenters explained how counties and cities develop budgets, the legal framework governing property taxes and other revenues, the distinction between restricted and unrestricted funds, and the role of constitutional officers, public safety, debt, pensions, and capital planning. They emphasized that most local revenues are restricted by law, that general funds are the main discretionary source, and that local governments must balance annual budgets while meeting mandated service levels. The presenters also discussed how property taxes, fees, local option taxes, and state-shared revenues support local services, and they highlighted the fiscal pressures created by public safety, emergency management, infrastructure, and retirement costs. Members asked questions about the share of local revenue that is unrestricted and the implications for any proposal to eliminate property taxes. The presenters responded that only a portion of county and municipal revenue is flexible, with much of it dedicated to specific purposes by law.

Transcript Highlights:

• The expense reimbursement policy is quite extensive.
• </c> um and that's a summary of the expense um and that's a summary of the expense policy<00:12:30.959
• their communication expenses during for their communication expenses during the<00:13:40.040><c> Bal<
• </c> the committee to cover other expenses the committee to cover other expenses for<00:15:00.600><c>
• I have a question for HR about the expense reimbursement.

Committee: House Rules and Legislative Administration

Transcript Highlights:

• Uh, and those drugs are expensive.
• </c><00:57:40.720><c> in</c> you need to add the word expensive in you need to add the word expensive
• </c> expensive when they come on the market. expensive when they come on the market.
• </c> offer this new more expensive drug. offer this new more expensive drug.
• </c> expensive option? expensive option?

Transcript Highlights:

• That's a lot of people, and currently it's an expensive system to run.
• That's a lot of people, and currently it's an expensive system to run.
• We never evaluated it and never considered whether it was cheaper or more expensive.
• That's too expensive. We can't do it.
• That's too expensive. We for dental. That's too expensive.

Summary: The segment focused first on Senator John Marty’s bill, SF 3612, which would remove private insurers and HMOs from Minnesota’s state health care programs and replace them with a statewide administrative services model. Marty argued that managed care has created churn, coverage disruptions, and administrative waste in Medicaid and MinnesotaCare, and said the state should instead pay providers directly while investing more in care coordination, case management, and wraparound services through primary care clinics and county-based purchasers. He said the goal is better care, not just savings, though he also cited potential taxpayer savings and pointed to Connecticut as a model. He acknowledged the bill is not expected to become law this year and said a fiscal note and more details are still pending. Marty said the proposal has support from the governor and groups such as the American Cancer Society, but that his current co-authors are all DFL members. He expressed hope for bipartisan support and said the simpler system would also improve fraud detection and transparency. He addressed concerns about insurance-industry jobs by saying workers should be treated fairly and that retraining and dislocated-worker assistance would be part of the transition. He also said the broader goal is universal coverage for all medical needs, including mental health and dental care, without co-pays or deductibles. The second half highlighted Senator Jeff Howe and Minnesota’s Hometown Heroes Assistance Program for firefighters. Howe described the program as a statewide effort for roughly 20,000 career, paid-on-call, and volunteer firefighters that provides up to $20,000 in assistance for occupational illnesses such as cancer and heart disease, along with training, counseling, and family support. He said the program helps firefighters process trauma and has been recognized as the nation’s most comprehensive firefighter well-being initiative. Howe said the most recent version of the bill received unanimous bipartisan support in both chambers, and he suggested future expansions could include retired firefighters and possibly peace officers. The segment also noted a separate therapy approach using retired racehorses to help first responders work through trauma, with participants saying it has helped them stay on the job and manage anxiety and PTSD.

Transcript Highlights:

• Essentially, it is a ratio of medical expense to premium that they receive.
• expense.
• Just let me clarify there: the plans pay for those out of their own expense.
• Are lobbying expenses anywhere referenced in administrative costs for plans?
• I believe legal expenses are included in what's reported here.

Summary: The Health Care Budget Subcommittee took up two bills and then continued oversight discussions with APD and AHCA. CS/HB 27, the Social Work Licensure Interstate Compact, was presented as a way to let Florida social workers practice in other compact states and vice versa; AARP, the Florida Chamber, and NASW Florida supported it, and the bill passed favorably. HB 1127, a child welfare bill, would create a treatment foster care pilot for children with high behavioral needs, improve DCF data collection on commercially sexually exploited children, and expand recruitment for protective investigators and case managers; the bill also passed favorably after brief supportive testimony. The committee then questioned APD at length about the iBudget waiver waitlist, enrollment pace, spending projections, and provider capacity. APD said it had sent more than 1,100 interest letters in categories 3, 4, and 5, enrolled 1,124 people so far this year, and expects to spend about 96.4% of its waiver appropriation, leaving roughly $82 million unspent. Members pressed APD on why prior discussions suggested more reserve was needed, how long the SANS process takes, whether category 6 could be expanded, and whether the agency has enough waiver support coordinators and direct support providers. APD said it has about 1,061 waiver support coordinators statewide, adequate capacity for current enrollees, but would need further analysis if the legislature directed a much larger enrollment increase. Members also asked about outreach, annual maintenance of the waitlist, portability for military families, and whether communication efforts should be privatized. Finally, AHCA walked the committee through the 2023 Achieved Savings Rebate (ASR) report for Aetna and explained how the report is used for financial monitoring, rebate calculations, and transparency. AHCA said the ASR is separate from the medical loss ratio (MLR) calculation, though both are reviewed, and that Florida uses the ASR mechanism rather than an MLR remittance requirement to recover funds from plans. Members asked about related-party disclosures, CVS/Caremark relationships, expanded benefits, encounter data, network adequacy penalties, denials and appeals reporting, interest earned on capitation payments, and whether rate increases were reaching providers. AHCA and the outside auditors said they review the plans’ reported data, reconcile it to underlying records, and can assess liquidated damages for network adequacy violations; several members requested follow-up data on rebates, interest, provider capacity, and related-party reporting.

Transcript Highlights:

• </c> fair plans are generally more expensive fair plans are generally more expensive and<00:16:03.639
• </c> also looking at from the expenses also looking at from the expenses incurred<00:39:59.119><c> by
• Now, for HPIA, the biggest expense, and really the massive expense, is the reinsurance expense.
• Now, for HPIA, the biggest expense, and really the massive expense, is the reinsurance expense.
• um the biggest expense and really hpia um the biggest expense and really the<00:47:47.960><c> the</c

Transcript Highlights:

• It is less expensive on balance.
• expensive construction type.
• Healthcare in a correctional environment is a doubly expensive construction type.
• I mentioned building in a correctional setting is very expensive.
• Some of the most expensive projects we have in our portfolio.

Summary: The Special Commission on Correctional Consolidation and Collaboration met on October 17 with members attending in person and virtually. The commission approved the September 15 minutes and then heard a detailed presentation from DCAM Commissioner Adam Bakey on the correctional facilities portfolio, including the age and condition of DOC and sheriff facilities, deferred maintenance, ADA compliance, decarbonization mandates, and how capital funding is allocated. Bakey said the correctional portfolio includes 36 facilities, with average ages over 50 years, and described how older, rapidly built facilities from the tough-on-crime era now face significant maintenance and replacement needs. He also explained the distinction between catch-up deferred maintenance and ongoing keep-up needs, and noted that construction costs and code thresholds have made projects more expensive. Commissioners and sheriffs asked about ADA requirements, aging and overcrowded facilities, hazardous materials, parts availability for obsolete systems, plumbing and health risks, and whether a newer, more modern correctional facility should be considered. Bakey said many projects trigger broader code upgrades, that some dormant facilities remain in the portfolio, and that health-care and correctional construction are among the most expensive building types. He outlined current funding, including annual deferred maintenance allocations for DOC and formula-based five-year commitments for sheriffs, plus a new competitive capital program for larger sheriff projects. He also explained the Designer Selection Board and “house doctor” process used to procure architects and engineers. The commission then shifted to planning its next steps, focusing on public input. Members agreed the next meeting should likely be a public hearing or include public testimony, with possible input from people with lived experience and consideration of facility tours, especially of women’s facilities such as Framingham. Members emphasized the need to define the commission’s scope clearly so testimony stays focused on structural and consolidation issues rather than all correctional policy topics. The meeting ended with plans for the co-chairs to coordinate the public process and a motion to adjourn, which passed without opposition.

Transcript Highlights:

• expenses.
• First is medical expenses.
• They are only expenses, their own operating expenses. Thank you. Senator Kessel. Thank you, Mr.
• , that huge labor expense.
• , that huge labor expense.

Summary: The committee was called to order, a quorum was established, and the minutes from the prior meeting were approved. The first major presentation came from Montana Public Employees Retirement System executive director William Hollahan, who gave an overview of Montana’s Volunteer Firefighters’ Compensation Act plan. He explained that the plan covers volunteer firefighters in unincorporated areas, is funded by 5% of state fire insurance premium taxes, and currently serves 228 departments with about 2,936 active members and 1,242 retirees. He described eligibility rules, annual training and reporting requirements, benefit levels for partial and full pensions, disability, death, medical, and funeral benefits, and said the plan is actuarially sound with roughly $60 million in assets and a funded ratio slightly above 100%. Committee members asked about prior-service credit, whether EMS personnel are included, the effect on recruitment and retention, and whether expanding coverage would require a funding analysis; Hollahan said prior service is not credited, EMS is not currently included, and any expansion would need financial review. Tim Walleen of Workforce Safety and Insurance then presented a draft North Dakota workers’ compensation solution for volunteer firefighters and volunteer EMS personnel. He explained that volunteer responders are already covered by workers’ comp for medical and wage-loss benefits, but the proposal would set a minimum annual wage of $30,000 for calculating wage-loss benefits for qualifying volunteers, with the benefit paid at two-thirds of that amount. Representative Porter suggested tying the volunteer definition to existing code rather than a fixed dollar amount, and Walleen agreed. Questions focused on whether search and rescue or other volunteer emergency services could be included, whether departments would face new paperwork, and whether volunteer organizations can already elect coverage; Walleen said there would be no additional paperwork and that volunteer coverage is already available. The committee also heard from volunteer fire service representatives and the state fire marshal. An Oakes-area firefighter, Mr. Olson, testified that small departments are struggling with retention, communication, and administrative burdens, especially around separate bookkeeping and funding rules for donated or fundraising money, and he said departments need clearer guidance from the state. State Fire Marshal Dr. Matthew Clark introduced himself and outlined a broader effort to improve education, support, and coordination for fire departments, including a planned 10% audit of certificates of existence beginning in 2027, more outreach through his office, and better assistance with training, reporting, and grant access. He said his office is authorized under current law to provide these services, but the role has been vague and underused. Finally, Arnagard Rural Fire District Chief Rick Schreiber testified in favor of new recruitment and retention ideas, including retirement-style benefits, health insurance, tax incentives, scholarships, grants, and more remote or regional training. He said volunteer departments are losing members, that local tax and donation funds are already stretched, and that any new retirement or incentive program should be sustainable and likely involve a mix of state and local support.

Transcript Highlights:

• The second one is, um, essentially our expenses and profitability over the last decade.
• And as you see, the expenses, they virtually remain flat the entire time.
• </c><00:17:25.919><c> from</c> and the actual operating expenses from and the actual operating expenses
• </c> then doit was a significant expense then doit was a significant expense because<00:20:20.600><c>
• No, and certainly not just discounting the fact that expenses matter.

Summary: The committee heard a budget presentation from New Hampshire Lottery Director Charlie McIntyre and CFO Jim Durus. McIntyre said the Lottery has more than tripled its return to the Education Trust Fund since 2011, from $62 million to $207 million in FY 24, while keeping expenses relatively flat over time. He explained that the Lottery operates like a business, is heavily audited, and that the governor’s budget raises the FY 26-27 revenue estimate to $185 million, up about $12 million annually from prior estimates. He attributed FY 24’s unusually strong results to record Powerball sales driven by a spike in billion-dollar jackpots tied to higher interest rates, and said scratch tickets still make up most gross sales, though Powerball is the highest-margin product. Members questioned the Lottery about the difference between gross revenue and profit, the steep rise in operating expenses, and the reasons for requested budget increases. McIntyre said the main drivers were payroll, benefits, advertising, added regulatory responsibilities from expanded gaming, and a new Salesforce customer-tracking system. He also described requested capital needs, including an outdated security system, building access and ADA improvements, and upgrades to the front office for employee safety. He said the security system is still running on an old Windows 7-based setup and that the requested upgrade would modernize cameras and add redundancy. The discussion also covered staffing and gaming expansion. McIntyre said the Lottery has 84 employees including three commissioners, with 13 funded vacancies, and that it plans to fill positions as two new gaming rooms come online in Rochester and Derry. He said the Lottery’s revenue estimates were revised upward because sports betting in Massachusetts had less impact than expected and historic horse racing machines have been more profitable than forecast. He also explained the governor’s proposal to shift historic horse racing toward slot-style machines, saying the physical machines would look largely the same but the content and math would change, and that the state’s revenue share would increase under the proposal. No votes were taken; the committee mainly asked questions and received explanations about the Lottery’s budget and revenue assumptions.

Transcript Highlights:

• of housing is the largest expense.
• Everything is making building housing harder and more expensive.
• Land is incredibly expensive.
• Land is incredibly expensive.
• We don't want more housing at the expense of affordability.

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:

• And we said, well, they'll be eligible when they incurred the expense.
• The other clarification was in qualified expenses there on page one.
• The tutoring, we had tutoring listed as a qualified expense.
• One of the qualifying expenses that we had was curriculum.
• One of the qualifying expenses that we had was curriculum.

Committee: Senate Local Government and Taxation

Transcript Highlights:

• Operating Expenses: 75,334,775.
• Maintenance Expenses: 942,684. Food Service Expenses: 315,677,333. I.
• Operating Expenses. Operating Expenses. Page 37, House Bill 26-1410.
• Operating Expenses: 7897,584.
• Operating<03:49:02.479><c> Expenses</c><03:49:02.880><c> C92</c> Operating Expenses C92 Operating Expenses

Transcript Highlights:

• </c><00:03:54.959><c> after</c><00:03:55.360><c> proposed</c> total expenses after proposed total expenses
• </c> students at more expensive institutions. students at more expensive institutions.
• Hopkins, would expense allowance. Uh Mr.
• </c> the living and miscellaneous expense the living and miscellaneous expense allowance<01:36:20.320
• </c> miscellaneous expenses across the board. miscellaneous expenses across the board.

Summary: The Higher Education Conference Committee reviewed differences among the Governor’s, House, and Senate proposals for state grant parameter changes and their effects on state grant spending, North Star Promise spending, and average student awards. Nonpartisan staff explained that the proposals use different combinations of parameter changes, with the Governor’s and Senate plans modeled to avoid or minimize rationing, while the House plan would require rationing to balance the program. Staff reported projected biennium balances of a positive $29.836 million for the Governor’s proposal, a negative $60.758 million for the House proposal without rationing, a positive $994,000 for the House proposal with rationing, and a positive $3.623 million for the Senate proposal; North Star Promise balances also varied, with the Senate showing a positive balance and the Governor and House with rationing showing negative balances. Staff also said the Senate proposal would extend availability of the state grant appropriation and suspend surplus procedures through fiscal year 2029, allowing the balance to carry forward. The committee then focused on the House-only tuition and fee cap provision, which would limit the tuition recognized for state grant purposes for four-year programs to the University of Minnesota Twin Cities level, with 1% annual increases in fiscal years 2026 and 2027. House members said the cap was intended to address rising tuition, especially at the University of Minnesota, and to produce savings in the state grant program. The governor’s office confirmed the provision was not included in the Governor’s bill. Representatives from the University of Minnesota and the Minnesota Private College Council opposed the cap, arguing it would reduce awards for low-income students and shift costs to students rather than address underlying tuition pressures; they also said it could discourage enrollment at higher-cost institutions. Supporters from Minnesota State argued the cap would improve fairness because students at lower-tuition institutions are effectively capped lower, while students at more expensive institutions receive larger awards, and they said the legislature should intervene in a variable that has grown substantially over time. Committee members questioned how the cap would work and whether it was tied to the Twin Cities campus rate. Testifiers clarified that the state grant formula is tied to the University of Minnesota level, but because Minnesota State institutions are below that level, the cap effectively limits their students to their own lower tuition while allowing higher awards at the University of Minnesota and private colleges. No formal vote or final action was taken in the portion of the meeting provided; the chair indicated the committee would continue with item-by-item review of the remaining parameter changes and hear additional testimony from agencies and institutions.

Transcript Highlights:

• And it’s for expenses related to this Great American State Fair.
• the spend of the House contingent expense line and the Senate contingent expense line, it does seem,
• Do we anticipate to spend the contingent expenses funds down to zero?
• This is the core for the institution expense and equipment.
• This is the core for the institution expense and equipment.

Committee: House Budget

Summary: The committee first heard the Missouri National Guard’s FY 2027 budget request in House Bill 2008. Brigadier General Bob Payne outlined the Guard’s dual state and federal mission, recent deployments and state activations, counter-drug work, and the need to maintain readiness and aging armory infrastructure. Members questioned several items, including a proposed internal auditor position required by statute, a World Cup-related NDI, the use of general revenue versus other funds, and a federal match for base operations support at Rosecrans Airport. The presentation then shifted into executive session, where the committee reviewed a House committee substitute and several amendments. One amendment to fund the Missouri State Fair’s Great American State Fair participation with ag and tourism funds was rejected, while an amendment reducing $50,000 in House and Senate legal contingency funding was adopted. Another amendment directing budget information to all committee members rather than only chairs was rejected. The committee then adopted the substitute and voted House Bill 2014 do pass by a 24-0-1 vote. The committee next took up the Department of Corrections FY 2027 budget in House Bill 2009. DOC described a new CERT stipend increase, a reduction in the Office of Director’s Staff, and several core items including professional standards, federal funds, community treatment programming, education grants, population growth pool, restitution payments, human services staff, telecommunications, general services, fuel and utilities, food purchases, food service, staff training, employee health and safety, overtime, adult institution staff, institution E&E, wage and discharge, and individual institutions. Members asked about the CERT stipend, PREA allegations, education funding, restitution payments, the population growth pool, the working capital revolving fund, food service costs, overtime, retention, warden turnover, the prison nursery, and the use of inmate canteen funds. DOC said CERT members are full-time employees who volunteer for additional duty, that staffing has improved but remains a challenge, that the food service increase reflects the end of inventory credits and inflation, and that the department generally spends non-GR funds first when possible. Discussion also turned to whether DOC facilities could be repurposed for pretrial or mental health populations; DOC said it is legally limited to post-sentence inmates and that staffing and labor-market constraints make reopening closed facilities difficult.

Transcript Highlights:

• Education, much of education in California is incredibly expensive. So expensive.
• Incredibly expensive. So what do we do? We subsidize.
• The schools are incredibly expensive. Why?
• Education, much of education in California is incredibly expensive. So expensive.
• This is why my kids are going to school in Utah. expensive. So expensive.

Summary: The Senate Budget and Fiscal Review Committee held an informational hearing on California’s Budget Stabilization Account, or Rainy Day Fund, with opening remarks focused on the state’s long history of revenue volatility and the role reserves play in smoothing downturns. The Legislative Analyst’s Office explained that California’s personal income tax base is highly volatile because high-income earners’ income is tied to capital gains and other fluctuating sources, and that Proposition 2’s current reserve rules set aside 1.5% of General Fund revenues plus a share of excess capital gains, but cap constitutional deposits at 10% of General Fund taxes. The LAO said its analysis evaluates reserve policy over decades and found the current system would cover about 30% of funding shortfalls in a 90th-percentile downturn scenario over 50 years, which is an improvement over no reserve but still inadequate. The LAO recommended raising the reserve cap substantially, ultimately to 50% by 2055, with an immediate increase to 20% and gradual increases thereafter. It also suggested either replacing Proposition 2’s deposit formulas with broader rules that capture volatility across all tax revenues or, alternatively, depositing all excess capital gains rather than only a share. The Department of Finance said the Governor’s prior proposal similarly sought to raise the cap from 10% to 20% and exclude reserve deposits and withdrawals from the state appropriations limit, arguing those two constraints limited the state’s ability to save during recent revenue surges. Other panelists and members discussed whether reserves should be paired with broader structural changes, including unemployment insurance reform, safety-net funding, infrastructure reserves, and the projected surplus temporary holding account. The California Budget and Policy Center supported reserve reform but emphasized balancing savings with current needs and noted other tools such as revenue increases, borrowing from special funds, and the new surplus-holding account. Members debated the causes and effects of Proposition 13, the appropriations limit, business departures, and whether reserve policy should be more directly tied to protecting Californians’ access to health care, food assistance, child care, and other core services. No votes or formal actions were taken, as the hearing was informational only.

Transcript Highlights:

• Education, much of education in California is incredibly expensive. So expensive.
• Incredibly expensive. So what do we do? We subsidize.
• Education, much of education in California is incredibly expensive. So expensive.
• This is why my kids are going to school in Utah. expensive. So expensive.
• Incredibly expensive. So what do we do? We subsidize.

Committee: Senate Budget and Fiscal Review

Summary: The Senate Budget and Fiscal Review Committee held an informational hearing on California’s Budget Stabilization Account, or Rainy Day Fund, with presentations from the Legislative Analyst’s Office, the Department of Finance, Practical Idealism Economics, and the California Budget and Policy Center. The LAO explained that California’s revenue volatility is driven largely by the personal income tax and high-income capital gains, and described how Proposition 2 deposits work, the 10% cap on the BSA, and the LAO’s evaluation that the current policy would cover only about 30% of funding shortfalls over 50 years in an unfavorable benchmark scenario. The LAO recommended raising the cap to 50% over time and either adopting broader deposit rules or depositing all excess capital gains. Finance said the administration had proposed raising the cap to 20% and excluding reserve deposits and withdrawals from the state appropriations limit. The Budget Center supported reserve reform but stressed balancing savings with current service needs and noted other tools such as revenue changes, borrowing from special funds, and the new Projected Surplus Temporary Holding Account. Committee members debated the purpose and adequacy of reserves, the role of the state appropriations limit, and whether reserves should be paired with broader fiscal reforms. Several senators argued that reserves are needed to preserve core services during downturns and that the current system is too complicated and too small, while others emphasized the need to protect spending on health care, child care, and other services for working Californians. There was also discussion of infrastructure spending as a possible countercyclical tool and whether deposits for infrastructure should be treated differently under reserve and SAL rules. The LAO said the Legislature has flexibility in defining infrastructure spending and suggested an infrastructure fund could function as a separate reserve-like mechanism. A significant portion of the hearing turned to broader tax and budget policy, including repeated references to Proposition 13, the state’s revenue structure, business departures, unemployment insurance financing, and the impact of inequality on California’s fiscal resilience. Some members argued Prop. 13 was driven by affordability concerns for homeowners, while others said it created loopholes that benefit corporations and constrain local revenue. The hearing did not take any vote or formal action; it remained informational, with the chair indicating the committee would continue questions and public comment after the panel discussion.

Transcript Highlights:

• I have also seen in the bill the allowance of any homeschool expenses.
• And this bill is modeled after the Coverdell K-12 expenses, which includes..."
• And so when we think of, like, the offset here, right, so these expenses, but we know these expenses
• It's always been so STOs can only keep 10 percent to pay for their expenses.
• I think there are some small businesses that are already taking the whole expense because their expense

Committee: Senate Senate Finance Committee of Reference

Summary: The Senate Finance Committee heard a series of bills, many dealing with cryptocurrency and tax administration. SB 1042 would allow certain state retirement and treasury funds to invest up to 10% in virtual currency; SB 1043 would let state agencies accept cryptocurrency payments; SB 1044 and SCR 1003 would exempt virtual currency from property tax, with SB 1044 contingent on voter approval of the referral. All four measures advanced on 4-3 votes, with Democratic members largely opposing them as risky, speculative, and favoring wealthy crypto interests. The committee also considered SB 1221, which would require the Department of Revenue to notify legislative tax chairs before adopting a new tax interpretation or application that would adversely affect taxpayers and to testify if a hearing is held. Supporters framed it as transparency and good governance, while opponents worried about added red tape and administrative burden. The bill passed 4-3. Another major item, SB 1142, would opt Arizona into a new federal scholarship tax credit program administered through certified scholarship-granting organizations; supporters said it would expand scholarship opportunities for public, charter, private, and homeschool students, while opponents argued it would deepen inequities, lack accountability, and divert resources from public schools. That bill also passed 4-3. A lengthy discussion followed on the Department of Revenue’s press release about tax conformity and the governor’s executive order. DOR explained that the forms were issued assuming conformity with federal changes, including the standard deduction and certain below-the-line adjustments, and said taxpayers generally should file on time but may need amended returns if the Legislature later changes the law. Members pressed DOR on the cost and clarity of the guidance, with estimates that widespread amendments could cost the department about $20 million. Finally, the committee heard SB 1254, which would require both grantor and grantee signatures on real property conveyances before recording; county assessors said it would reduce deed-fraud risk and fix recording gaps. County officials from Maricopa and Mohave supported the bill.

Transcript Highlights:

• </c><00:05:29.199><c> to</c><00:05:29.360><c> the</c> to avoid the travel expense to the to avoid the
• Uh, most of them have only travel expenses and what have you.
• What you wouldn't get compensated for is travel expenses, you know, mileage and meals and hotels.
• Uh, most of them have only travel expenses and what have you.
• What you wouldn't get compensated for is travel expenses, you know, mileage and meals and hotels.

Committee: House State Government

Transcript Highlights:

• Thank you. states any other educational expense states any other educational expense approved<00:03:56.400
• </c> interpretation of qualifying expenses. interpretation of qualifying expenses.
• it is very clearly qualifying expenses?
• </c> um under Roman numeral 2 the expenses um under Roman numeral 2 the expenses are<00:06:46.240><c>
• </c><00:10:30.800><c> available</c> qualified educational expense available qualified educational expense

Committee: House Education Policy and Administration

Summary: The committee first heard HB 1334, which would remove the Education Freedom Account scholarship organization’s authority to approve “any other educational expense” under the EFA statute. The prime sponsor, Representative Porchelli, said the bill would narrow the law to the specifically listed qualifying expenses, avoid broad interpretation, and shift any questions to the Department of Education or the legislative oversight committee. In response to questions, she said she did not think the open-ended category had been needed and that the statute already clearly lists allowable expenses. A representative of the Children’s Scholarship Fund testified in opposition, saying the category is used rarely but is important for unusual cases, especially students with special needs, and that removing it could create unintended consequences. After testimony, the chair closed the hearing on HB 1334. The committee then heard HB 1513, which would move several EFA reporting and oversight requirements from administrative rules and the contract with the Children’s Scholarship Fund into statute. Representative Porchelli said the bill would consolidate existing requirements on timely responses to oversight requests, publication of expense reports by category and provider, and transmission of eligibility and enrollment data to the Department of Education. She described the bill as mostly a clarification and transparency measure rather than a substantive policy change. Members asked about the meaning of “timely access,” the 45-day deadline, whether the contract already covered these duties, and whether the scholarship organization had ever failed to comply. The Children’s Scholarship Fund said it had generally met the 45-day deadline, had not knowingly refused information requests, and that the quarterly reporting requirement could add cost; the sponsor said the DOE had provided guidance and was neutral. The hearing on HB 1513 was then closed. Finally, the committee heard HB 1256, which would repeal the state librarian’s authority to award scholarships for graduate library school attendance at American Library Association-accredited schools. Representative Drago said the law was unnecessary because the state does not currently have a state librarian, scholarships are not typically granted by statute, and he objected to the ALA accreditation requirement and what he described as the association’s political advocacy. In questions, he clarified that the bill targets the accreditation requirement rather than a specific school and said he did not think the state should direct taxpayer-funded scholarships toward ALA-accredited programs. A member raised First Amendment concerns, but the sponsor said the issue was not speech itself, only the use of taxpayer dollars and state law to support that direction. The transcript cuts off before any vote or final action on HB 1256.