Transcript Highlights:

• So I asked for an out-of-cycle rule review.
• Review the needs assessment report to... B.
• To review the plan proposal submitted under section 25-17-754.
• Director review decision.
• Upon review, um, a memo was written by Upon review, um, a memo was written by OSA at the request of the

Transcript Highlights:

• And we should be reviewing outcomes.
• Audit and Review Committee.
• And we should be reviewing outcomes.
• Audit and Review Committee.
• Audit and Review Committee.

Summary: The committee first received staff briefings on amendments for a series of bills, including measures on child care workforce standards, homelessness programs, community preservation authorities, domestic violence survivor relief, public defense funding, student behavioral health supports, water system ownership changes, nonprofit health carrier surplus assessments, 340B drug pricing reporting, Secretary of State filing fees, step housing, campaign security reimbursements, digital equity programs, a Boys and Men’s Commission, a waste-to-energy facility’s Climate Commitment Act obligations, 6PPD tire substitutes, and an early education scholarship. Staff described the policy changes and, where available, the expected fiscal effects of each proposed substitute or line amendment. The committee then went into caucus before returning for executive session. In executive session, the committee voted out House Bill 1073, then adopted a Couture line amendment to House Bill 1128 exempting private K-12 schools with licensed child care programs from the child care employer definition before reporting the bill out as Second Substitute House Bill 1128. House Bill 1316, 1408, 1591, 1592, 1634, 1906, 1960, 2073, 2145, 2248, 2266, 2301, 2333, and 2365 were also reported from committee, with several amendments adopted along the way. Notable actions included adopting an emergency clause for House Bill 1408, rejecting proposed amendments to House Bill 1591 that would have narrowed relief for survivors and removed retroactivity, adopting a narrower amendment to House Bill 1592’s public defense funding formula, and adopting a substitute to House Bill 2145 that limited 340B reporting to hospitals. The committee also debated and rejected several amendments to the step housing bill, House Bill 2266, including proposals for larger school/daycare buffers, more local oversight, and broader local government authority; the bill still advanced on a 16-13 vote. House Bill 2073, which requires nonprofit health carriers to contribute surplus funds to Cascade Care Savings, advanced over concerns about using one-time money for an ongoing program. House Bill 2248 advanced after an amendment redirected annual license fee deposits to the state treasury rather than the Secretary of State’s revolving fund. House Bill 2333 was narrowed to allow use of campaign funds for personal security reimbursements, and House Bill 2365 advanced with some amendments adopted and others rejected as the committee began discussing additional digital equity oversight provisions.

Transcript Highlights:

• Today we are reviewing budget and fiscal issues related to the Department of Health Care Services, otherwise
• Is that available for legislative review? Are we, is there any restrictions on us seeing that?
• Is that available for legislative review? Are we, is there any restrictions on us seeing that?
• Services are provided to older adults, and PACE participants have to undergo a level of care review to
• We're required to review all Medi-Cal managed care plans and county mental health plan discrimination

Summary: The committee heard a budget oversight hearing on the Department of Health Care Services, focusing first on the overall Medi-Cal budget and a March General Fund loan to cover a current-year shortfall. DHCS said the 2025-26 budget proposal totals $193.4 billion, with Medi-Cal projected at $188.1 billion total funds and $42.1 billion General Fund, driven by higher enrollment, pharmacy costs, managed care growth, and costs tied to eligibility expansions and the COVID-era redetermination unwinding. The department said the $3.44 billion loan was needed to manage cash flow and ensure timely payments to providers and plans, while the LAO noted Medi-Cal’s cash-basis budgeting creates volatility and that more detailed estimates would come with the May Revision. Members discussed federal Medicaid threats, the need for transparency on cost drivers, and the impact of pharmacy spending, long-term care, and immigration-related coverage expansions. The second major topic was family health programs, including California Children’s Services, the continuous coverage unwinding, and opioid settlement fund spending. DHCS described CCS funding methodology changes, ongoing county stakeholder work, and a delayed rollout of CCS monitoring and oversight until July 1, 2025, while county representatives and advocates argued the program is underfunded and asked for more technical assistance and a delay in implementation. On the unwinding, the department explained that federal redetermination flexibilities helped maintain coverage after the pandemic, but the Governor’s budget proposes ending them at the end of June 2025; advocates urged making the flexibilities permanent to avoid coverage losses. For opioid settlement funds, DHCS and Finance said the budget increases funding for naloxone distribution while reducing other harm-reduction spending based on updated settlement revenues, prompting criticism from members and public commenters who argued the change would weaken effective harm-reduction programs. The hearing also included an update on Proposition 35 implementation. DHCS said the voter-approved measure continuously appropriates MCO tax revenues beginning in 2025, with up to $4.6 billion annually available for specified Medi-Cal and provider investments in 2025 and 2026, but implementation depends on consultation with the required stakeholder advisory committee. The department and LAO noted uncertainty about future federal rules affecting the MCO tax after 2026. Public testimony largely supported maintaining Medi-Cal expansions, protecting immigrant coverage, preserving harm-reduction funding, and increasing support for community health workers, pediatric dental care, and CCS county administration. No votes were taken during the portion of the hearing provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• or get through the review process.
• There's also a concern that if a third-party reviewer reviews a project and has a contract to review
• days to review or get through<00:25:04.679><c> the</c><00:25:04.840><c> review</c><00:25:05.520><c>
• > and</c><00:25:14.000><c> has</c> party reviewer reviews a project and has party reviewer reviews a
• </c><00:29:42.880><c> but</c><00:29:43.039><c> these</c> thirdparty reviewer but these thirdparty reviewer

Committee: House Finance

Transcript Highlights:

• </c> review all of our findings in this area. review all of our findings in this area.
• ><c> a</c><00:24:07.919><c> leader,</c><00:24:08.799><c> one</c> reviewed clearly had a leader, one reviewed
• </c> reviewing out of 30 years of operation. reviewing out of 30 years of operation.
• review? review? &gt;&gt; Representative<01:21:20.800><c> Qu.</c> &gt;&gt; Representative Qu.
• Budget for review.

Transcript Highlights:

• Moving them from the base rates while maintaining PUC's authority and review. Move passage.
• Our institutions already go through rigorous curriculum review processes.
• The concerning aspect of this bill is that it creates curriculum review committees.
• , like the president reviewing the degrees and the like.
• SB 227 by West relating to the application review process for certain delayed birth certificates.

Bills: SB37 , SJR84 , SJR87 , SJR27 , SB8 , SB10 , SB227 , SB261 , SB15 , SB12 , SB25 , SB57 , SB127 , SB293 , SB441 , SB3059 , SB512 , SB241 , SB1718 , SB140 , SB2055 , SB2075 , SB2018 , SB1534 , SB1567 , SB785 , SB1233 , SB1580 , SB1663 , SB413 , SB447 , SB519 , SB467 , SB1579 , SB1191 , SB1021 , SB1838 , SB2807 , SB2835 , SB546 , SB2121 , SB2167 , SB2035 , SB2024 , SB1032 , SB1049 , SB1266 , SB1400 , SB1302 , SB401 , SB1596 , SB1281 , SB1242 , SB1343 , SB310 , SB1346 , SB2753 , SB2703 , SB2221 , SB1719 , SB2177 , SB800 , SB790 , SB748 , SB571 , SB1957 , SB1923 , SB1896 , SB1760 , SB1335 , SB2368 , SB2477 , SB2587 , SB2972 , SB2986 , SB2965 , SB1563 , SB1467 , SB1164 , SB1137 , SB614 , SB705 , SB961 , SB918 , SB955 , SB869 , SB850 , SB863 , SB1610 , SB1055 , SB2206 , SB457 , SB2337 , SB1362 , SCR9 , SB2405 , SB2406 , SB2407 , SB2166 , SB2148 , SB535 , SB777 , SB827 , SB1141 , SB1330 , SB1352 , SB1664 , SB1862 , SB1936 , SB1453 , SB1448 , SB1398 , SB2137 , SB2111 , SB53 , SB226 , SB1677 , SB1723 , SB1839 , SB36 , SB38 , SB815 , SB1856 , SB552 , SB646 , SB37 , SJR84 , SJR87 , SJR27 , SB8 , SB10 , SB227 , SB261 , SB15 , SB12 , SB25 , SB57 , SB127 , SB293 , SB441 , SB3059 , SB512 , SB241 , SB1718 , SB140 , SB2055 , SB2075 , SB2018 , SB1534 , SB1567 , SB785 , SB1233 , SB1580 , SB1663 , SB413 , SB447 , SB519 , SB467 , SB1579 , SB1191 , SB1021 , SB1838 , SB2807 , SB2835 , SB546 , SB2121 , SB2167 , SB2035 , SB2024 , SB1032 , SB1049 , SB1266 , SB1400 , SB1302 , SB401 , SB1596 , SB1281 , SB1242 , SB1343 , SB310 , SB1346 , SB2753 , SB2703 , SB2221 , SB1719 , SB2177 , SB800 , SB790 , SB748 , SB571 , SB1957 , SB1923 , SB1896 , SB1760 , SB1335 , SB2368 , SB2477 , SB2587 , SB2972 , SB2986 , SB2965 , SB1563 , SB1467 , SB1164 , SB1137 , SB614 , SB705 , SB961 , SB918 , SB955 , SB869 , SB850 , SB863 , SB1610 , SB1055 , SB2206 , SB457 , SB2337 , SB1362 , SCR9 , HB5560 , HB762 , HB 107 , HB 114 , HB300 , HB138 , HB4386 , HB2495 , HB581 , HB3348 , HB5323

Summary: The House convened, established a quorum, heard an invocation and pledges, and approved several routine motions, including excuses for absent members, permission for committees to meet while the House was in session, and postponements of some bills. The chamber also received a Senate message listing measures passed by the Senate and adopted a memorial resolution honoring the 21 victims of the Robb Elementary School shooting in Uvalde, with remarks entered into the House Journal after a moment of silence. The House then took up a long third-reading calendar and passed a series of Senate bills on topics including criminal justice and corrections sunset provisions (SB 2405, 2406, 2407), election equipment testing (SB 2166), electric grid reliability and attack-preparedness exercises (SB 2148), firefighter collective bargaining (SB 777), DFPS and foster care procedures (SB 1141 and SB 1398), Medicare durable medical equipment billing (SB 1330), property tax administration (SB 1453), probate cleanup and record transfers (SB 1448 and SB 1839), mental health filing procedures (SB 53), school residency for children in safety placements (SB 226), diabetes-related amputation study (SB 1677), rapid DNA analysis (SB 1723), utility rate transparency and capacity cost recovery (SB 1664 and SB 1856), community supervision eligibility (SB 552 postponed), and other measures. Several bills passed with broad support, while others drew notable opposition and narrower margins, including SB 777, SB 2137, SB 2111, SB 1677, SB 1936, SB 1453, and SB 38. Two bills drew especially extensive debate. SB 2148, dealing with electricity supply chain reliability and tabletop exercises for critical facilities, was discussed as a grid-security measure aimed at coordinating utilities, law enforcement, ERCOT, and the PUC in the event of physical attacks; it passed unanimously. SB 1936, changing how LSD is measured for criminal prosecution from dosage-based to weight-based calculations, prompted extended discussion about lab consistency, carrier mediums, and fairness in charging, with supporters saying it would help crime labs and law enforcement and opponents warning it could distort penalties depending on the medium used; it passed 108-26. The House also passed SB 36, creating a Homeland Security Division within DPS, after questions about overlap with TDEM and the cost of adding personnel. Late in the day, the House debated SB 38 on eviction procedures, with supporters saying it targeted squatters and streamlined removal of unauthorized occupants, and opponents arguing it would make evictions too easy and worsen homelessness; it passed 85-44. The chamber also began debate on SB 37, a major higher-education governance bill that would expand governing-board oversight of curriculum, hiring, and faculty senates; members raised concerns about academic freedom, faculty governance, and the impact on humanities programs, and debate was still underway at the end of the transcript.

Transcript Highlights:

• General Court, the petition proposed to grant the judicial branch new and unprecedented authority to review
• powers of the courts, and insofar as it grants the judicial branch new and unprecedented authority to review
• take note of, while the Attorney General did certify these for the ballot, we all know now that her review
• recently to many members of the committee and many members of the Senate, quite frankly, were not reviewed
• But again, it should be noted: the Attorney General's review, when it comes to moving ballot initiatives

Transcript Highlights:

• report with one change: before any increase in the state contribution amount, the amount must be reviewed
• The state contribution amount must be reviewed by the budget committee established by IC 4-12-1-3.
• And number three, the legislation would require expending resources on research security reviews for
• So I guess the concern is: what are we basing the review on if we're asking universities to do a security
• review on the research, but they're on students who do not have that kind of data available?

Transcript Highlights:

• constitutional provision via Prop 139 has changed the landscape within which Arizona courts will review
• provisions like this are being questioned under the First Amendment, and the courts are actively reviewing
• Chairman, are the cases that are reviewing having to do with minors specifically? Mr. Chairman, Mr.
• And publishing, for purposes of the CDA, includes reviewing and deciding whether to publish certain materials
• Chairman, the Rules Office has reviewed each of the measures subject to that mass motion and has one

Summary: The Rules Committee considered several bills for constitutional and proper-form review, with the chair holding House Bill 2555. The committee heard legal analysis on House Bill 2060, which would prohibit public educational institutions and universities from encouraging or facilitating abortions; counsel flagged possible state constitutional issues in light of Proposition 139, but the committee still recommended the bill 5-3. House Bill 2085, dealing with gender transition procedures and referrals, was discussed at length for possible First Amendment concerns, especially around provider referrals, but it was also recommended 5-3. House Bill 2133, requiring age and consent verification for online sexual material, was flagged for possible federal preemption under Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act and was recommended 5-3. House Bill 2086, which would bar government entities from requiring masks or vaccinations, raised Supremacy Clause and intergovernmental immunity concerns because it included the federal government, but the sponsor was said to be working on an amendment; it passed 5-3. House Bill 2279, concerning liability and waivers for Grand Canyon river outfitters, drew an anti-abrogation clause concern, with staff saying ordinary negligence liability must remain available; it was also recommended 5-3. House Bill 2364, adding criminal penalties for mailing or delivering abortion-inducing drugs, was flagged as likely conflicting with the new abortion-rights language in Proposition 139, though staff said the courts were still sorting out the issue; it too passed 5-3. The committee then took up a large mass motion covering many additional bills, resolutions, and memorials. Staff noted one update on House Concurrent Resolution 2003, which would place on the ballot changes affecting school sports participation based on biological sex; they said the U.S. Supreme Court was considering similar laws from Idaho and West Virginia and that the outcome could affect the measure. No other specific concerns were raised on the mass motion items, and the committee recommended all of them 8-0. Throughout the meeting, members asked clarifying questions about the constitutional issues, including the effect of Proposition 139, the scope of First Amendment protections for medical providers, federal preemption, and the anti-abrogation clause. Several members voted no on the abortion- and gender-related bills, while the majority consistently voted to advance the measures as constitutional and in proper form. The meeting adjourned after the mass motion vote.

Transcript Highlights:

• I'm going to turn the time over now to our co-chair, our vice chair, to start with our rules review that
• As you know from other presentations from the previous year and this year so far, we have reviewed our
• Committee, from your review of that docket, are there any questions? Seeing none.
• Monday we have, I believe, Medicaid budget review, Health and Welfare review, so we're going to be moving

Committee: Senate Health and Welfare

Transcript Highlights:

• SB SB 75, Smallwood-Cuevas, due pass is amended to revise how continued eligibility review must be conducted
• SB 439 Weber-Pearson California health benefit review program. Do pass. Out on an A roll call.
• Okay, SB 363, Weiner, independent medical review, two-year bill, SB 378, Get Weiner, online cannabis
• SB 774, Committee on Business Professions and Economic Development, Sunset Review, Department of Real
• On an A roll call, SB 775, Committee on Business Professions and Economic Development, Sunset Review,

Committee: House Appropriations

Transcript Highlights:

• This instrument provides relative to mandatory pre-suit claim review process, to provide for mandatory
• This instrument provides relative to mandatory pre-suit claim review process to provide for mandatory
• pre-suit claim review process requirements to provide for independent evaluation of claims, to provide
• And I reviewed your bill this morning. I may have missed those amendments.
• Real quickly, review... Yes, Rep. Phelps may have been out of the room.

Committee: House Insurance

Transcript Highlights:

• This bill will help us review these gaps and holes in the tax system.
• This bill will help us review these gaps and holes in the tax system, which have unknown benefits and
• Previously, this type of analysis would have been done through the California Tax Expenditure Review
• Previously, this type of analysis would have been done through the California Tax Expenditure Review
• And just in follow-up, in addition, are we saying that the California Tax Expenditure Review Board is

Summary: The committee heard Senate Bill 1277, which would create a California Cost of Living Tax Credit modeled on the 2022 middle-class tax refund to provide refundable relief to low- and middle-income Californians facing high housing, fuel, energy, and general living costs. Senator Grove and supporters, including the California Policy Center and some local government representatives, argued the bill would put direct relief into the hands of working families. Opposition came from the California Tax Reform Association and the California Teachers Association, which said California already has progressive tax credits and that the proposal would be costly to the General Fund and reduce money for schools and other services. After extended debate, the bill was not advanced; a roll call vote on a motion to pass it to Appropriations failed 1-4, and the bill was held/fails on the floor with a request for reconsideration noted. The committee then heard SB 1287, which would create a capped tax credit to encourage private investment in short-line railroad infrastructure. The author and rail industry witnesses said the measure would improve safety, reliability, emissions, and freight movement, especially for rural communities and agriculture, and that it was a public-private partnership rather than a handout. Opposition from CTA and the California Tax Reform Association argued a direct grant program would be preferable to a tax credit. The bill was accepted with committee amendments and placed on call without a final vote in the transcript. Members also considered SB 1407, which would fully exempt military retirement pay and surviving spouse benefits from state income tax, increasing the prior partial exemption. The author, State Treasurer Fiona Ma, and veterans’ groups said the change would help retain veterans in California, support local economies, and align California with most other states. CTA and CTRA opposed on General Fund grounds. The committee approved the bill on a due-pass-as-amended motion to the Committee on Military and Veterans Affairs, with the roll call showing support and the bill placed on call. Later, the committee heard SB 1349, directing the Legislative Analyst’s Office to review major tax expenditures and evaluate their goals, beneficiaries, and effects on revenues and Proposition 98 funding. CTA, CTRA, and several local government and labor supporters backed the bill as a way to improve accountability for roughly $94 billion in annual tax expenditures. The bill was accepted with committee amendments and placed on call. The committee also heard SB 1078, authorizing Santa Cruz County to ask voters for a temporary half-cent sales tax to help fund health care and safety-net services amid federal cuts; it was placed on call. SB 1120, extending the California Competes Tax Credit through 2035 and making it refundable for certain strategic industries, received strong support from business and manufacturing groups and was passed on a due-pass-as-amended motion to Appropriations. Finally, SB 1275, which would replace the state sales tax on vehicle purchases with a vehicle license fee structure intended to increase federal deductibility for Californians, was passed 4-0 as amended to the Committee on Transportation.

Transcript Highlights:

• House Bill 1228 charged the board with reviewing specific issues related to management of the state's
• These included reviewing existing policies, and if necessary, And budget.
• These included reviewing existing policies and, if necessary, developing policies in coordination with
• agency cash management technology and opportunities to improve state cash management practices, reviewing
• As these reviews progressed, a few statewide themes consistently rose to the top.

Summary: The Leadership Division of the Budget Section approved the prior meeting minutes and then received an update from Senator Jonathan Sickler on the Cash Management Board’s interim work under House Bill 1278. He said the board has reviewed state cash, investments, and liquidity across agencies and concluded the state’s overall mix of long-term and short-term assets is appropriate, with about $35 billion in total liquid assets and investments and roughly 89% in longer-term investments. He highlighted process improvements already underway, including replacing more than 500 six-month CDs with a special-rate savings account to reduce administrative work, and said the board sees opportunities to improve forecasting, automation, and statewide coordination. Members asked about whether the CD change would increase returns, how the Legacy Fund transfer for the homestead tax relief bill affected earnings, and whether more state cash could be consolidated or better managed through BND; Sickler and BND staff said those issues are being studied and may lead to legislation for the 2027 session. Representative Nathan Toman then updated the committee on the Task Force on Government Efficiency. He said the group has focused less on cutting dollars and more on defining metrics and asking how the legislature knows whether programs are working. The task force is pushing a standard set of questions for new or expanding programs—who is affected, expected outcomes, alternatives, how success will be measured, and full funding—and OMB has agreed to require those answers in future budget requests. Members discussed possible use of dashboards, program evaluators, AI tools, and possible rule or statutory changes to require performance measurement. Toman said the task force will continue meeting with agencies such as the courts, university system, auditor, HHS, Commerce, and ITD to identify workflow bottlenecks and potential efficiencies. Phil Davis of Job Service North Dakota gave a workforce update, reporting that North Dakota’s unemployment rate is 2.5% and labor force participation is about 68.7%, both well above national performance. He described Job Service’s 15 workforce programs, including H-2A housing inspections for foreign agricultural workers, the job placement partnership program with DOCR, WOTC, and other federal and state workforce efforts. Davis said the agency served more than 11,000 individuals in 2025, operates nine workforce centers, and tracks outcomes through quarterly and annual reporting. In response to questions, he said job openings data reflect only positions in the system and may understate actual hiring needs, that child care and other assistance programs could be better tied to employment outcomes, and that the DOCR partnership has shown strong results with lower recidivism and higher earnings. He also said the H-2A inspection workload is growing quickly and additional staffing or less frequent federal inspection requirements could help. Allen Knutson then presented S&P Global’s updated revenue forecast. He said oil prices have risen sharply since the prior month’s outlook, improving the state’s near-term revenue picture, though the economy remains volatile and agriculture is facing weaker commodity prices. Based on the updated forecast, total major tax revenues for the current biennium are projected to be about $89 million above the legislative forecast, and the next biennium could be about $500 million higher, though that estimate is preliminary and may change. He also walked through an alternate oil-price scenario showing significantly higher oil and gas collections and a larger Strategic Investment Fund balance if prices remain elevated. Members asked whether another forecast should be requested once oil markets stabilize and about tribal allocation changes in the alternative scenario; Knutson said additional updates are possible through OMB and future forecast cycles.

Transcript Highlights:

• Of course, we will have to review the law and determine how we're in compliance with the law.
• But as I look at it and as the— To review the law and determine how we're in compliance with the law.
• If the statute were to contain this language, it would basically prevent any review.
• To offend you is that it denies access to court review.
• If the statute were to contain this language, it would basically prevent any review.

Committee: House State Affairs

Transcript Highlights:

• Eight have been before the EPSB and sent for further investigation and review, and eight are pending
• EPSB review right now.
• </c><00:08:39.279><c> and</c> further investigation and review and further investigation and review and
• </c> eight are pending EPSB review right now. eight are pending EPSB review right now.
• </c> and reviewable by all impacted parties. and reviewable by all impacted parties.

Committee: Senate Education

Transcript Highlights:

• So we're going to go centers tab number one committee jurisdiction and based budget review.
• I encourage you to take time to review each agency and I'll be happy to answer any questions that you
• We also have a medical review unit. So we have 2 doctors that we employ.
• The senators were on to tab number 4, another program review.
• This is done through the Credential Review Committee and the master credentials list.

Transcript Highlights:

• The purpose of the survey was to identify current protocols to review low-producing programs.
• The first question was, how frequently are you reviewing low-producing programs?
• How frequently are you reviewing low-producing programs?
• This hasn't been reviewed by anyone else.
• My understanding is the CIP codes do get reviewed from the federal...

Committee: Joint Higher Education Funding Review Committee

Transcript Highlights:

• We do appreciate the review.
• We subject ourselves to annual well-architected reviews by AWS.
• We welcome oversight and accountability, along with technical review.
• We would review it.” “They vet the supporting documentation and the eligibility.
• We would review it. they vet the supporting documentations and the eligibility.

Summary: The subcommittee met to hear budget-related updates from the Judicial Branch and the Office of Emergency Services, with no votes taken. The Judicial Council supported the Governor’s proposed budget, highlighting $70 million for increased trial court operating costs, additional funding for court-appointed counsel, Court of Appeal case processing, and courthouse construction and facilities. Trial court representatives emphasized staffing retention problems, especially in counties like San Bernardino, and said stable funding is needed to avoid delays and maintain access to justice. Members also discussed the branch’s remote proceedings program, which has been used in more than 6 million hearings statewide since 2022 and was described as especially important in rural areas and for vulnerable litigants; several members urged making the authority permanent rather than extending it temporarily. A major portion of the hearing focused on Proposition 36 implementation. Finance said the Governor’s budget maintains the $130 million provided in the 2025 Budget Act for court workload and pretrial services, but adds no new Prop. 36 court funding. Judicial Council staff reported nearly 35,000 felony Prop. 36 filings in 2025, with most cases still pending and only a small share of treatment-mandated cases already dismissed after treatment. Witnesses said courts are using the funds for staffing, coordinators, clerks, and treatment-court operations, but that workload varies widely by county and that data collection is limited because courts report aggregate information rather than case-level outcomes. The LAO raised a technical concern about the Department of Finance’s Prop. 47 savings estimate and recommended revising the methodology at May Revision. The committee also reviewed the Orange Central Justice Center facility modification project, where the Judicial Council explained that hidden construction deficiencies and fire-life-safety issues caused costs to rise substantially after demolition began. The LAO said the project itself was supportable but recommended that the Legislature set an ongoing funding level for court facilities, require a long-term facilities plan, and consider more oversight of facility modification projects. Finance said it continues to fund courthouse projects individually and through the State Public Works Board, while acknowledging project delays and cost increases. Finally, Cal OES and advocates discussed victim services funding. Cal OES said it administers about $315 million annually for victim service programs, including VOCA-funded services, but federal VOCA allocations have fluctuated sharply and the state has used one-time General Fund backfills to maintain services. Trauma recovery center advocates warned that an 85% reduction in funding would sharply reduce services for survivors of violent crime, while human trafficking advocates urged reauthorization of the Human Trafficking Victim Assistance Program before funding reverts to pre-pandemic levels in July 2026. Members asked about federal and state funding stability, referral pathways, and the long-term value of these programs in preventing worse outcomes and reducing public costs.

Transcript Highlights:

• materials and local review committees.
• Protecting whole-work review I think is very important, and I close. Thank you, Madam Speaker.
• And so parents under this amendment can still review and discuss content with their children.
• And so parents under this amendment can still review and discuss content with their children.
• In fact, we have charter review commissions that consider issues. Amend our charter.

Summary: The House convened with prayer, a moment of silence for former member Terry Fields and the Parkland victims, the Pledge of Allegiance, and routine organizational actions including approval of the journal and adoption of a special order report. The chamber then took up House Bill 1119, relating to materials harmful to minors, which the sponsor described as a measure to clarify and strengthen standards for removing obscene or pornographic content from public school classrooms and libraries while preserving educational uses and not targeting classical literature, LGBTQ content, or other protected viewpoints. Members questioned the bill’s use of terms such as “predominantly,” its relationship to existing local review processes, the impact on AP/IB and college-level materials, the applicability to voucher-funded schools, and the risk of additional First Amendment litigation and costs. The sponsor responded that the bill was needed because current standards were being bypassed and that the legislation was aimed at material harmful to minors, not general literary value. The House considered numerous amendments, most of which were defeated. Amendments offered by Representatives Gant, Aristide, Bartleman, Eskamani, Nixon, Rainer, Woodson, and Harris sought, among other things, to preserve parental choice during review periods, restore a whole-work constitutional standard, limit repeated objections, protect educational and abuse-prevention materials, prevent LGBTQ-inclusive books from being labeled harmful solely on that basis, shield school districts from funding penalties, and delay enforcement in districts already under litigation. Supporters of the amendments argued that the bill would encourage censorship, remove books with clear literary or educational value, burden districts with costs and lawsuits, and harm students who rely on school libraries for access to reading material and representation. Opponents of the amendments argued the bill was necessary to protect minors from explicit content and that the proposed changes would weaken that protection. All of the amendments described in the transcript failed. After the amendment process, the House waived rules, read HB 1119 a third time by title, and entered structured debate on final passage. In closing debate, opponents repeated concerns about constitutional vulnerability, overbroad book removals, and the educational harm of limiting access to literature, while supporters framed the bill as a child-protection measure and a clarification of existing law. The transcript ends during the structured debate on final passage, before the final vote on the bill is shown.