Transcript Highlights:

• What it doesn't discuss in that section is density.
• Um Um Um what<00:11:26.040><c> it</c><00:11:26.160><c> doesn't</c><00:11:26.600><c> discuss</c><00:11
• that section what it doesn't discuss in that section is<00:11:30.560><c> density.
• We struggle with the balance of development and sensitive conservation priorities.
• </c> balance of development and sensitive balance of development and sensitive conservation<01:03:27.840

Keywords: 1191, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Is there any further discussion? Seeing none, will the Secretary please call the roll?
• So any further discussion? Seeing none, will the Secretary please call the roll? Aye.
• Is there any further discussion? Seeing none, will the Secretary please call the roll?
• There are no amendments or any further discussion.
• Is there any further discussion? The Secretary will please call the vote.

Bills: HB2035, HB2086, HB2434, HB2611, HB2732, HB2733, HB2830, HB2923, HB2932, HB4004

Keywords: kinship care, child welfare, foster care, relative placement, child protection, vaccination mandates, mask requirements, public health, government entities, COVID-19, controlled substances, prescription monitoring, opioid crisis, healthcare regulations, patient safety, group homes, children's rights, safety protocols, employee training, mental health

Transcript Highlights:

• &gt;&gt; Any<00:05:54.080><c> discussion?</c> &gt;&gt; Any discussion? &gt;&gt; Any discussion?
• </c> discussion. All in favor? discussion. All in favor? &gt;&gt; I. &gt;&gt; I. &gt;&gt; I.
• </c> &gt;&gt; Thank you. further discussion. &gt;&gt; Thank you. further discussion.
• </c> sensitive information about somebody. sensitive information about somebody.
• . discussion. discussion.

Keywords: 1191, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• We will be discussing the Legislative Finance Committee and Executive Recommendations.
• So those are the two main programs I'll be discussing today. This is just a quick overview.
• So that's my rate increase A discussion on support decision making.
• code agency code, and you can find the LFC discussion in Volume 2 on pages 242 and pages 243.
• that you provided after today, and we'll be discussing those in the time ahead.

Keywords: 996, all

Transcript Highlights:

• , or we've already discussed one.
• So, any further discussion? Seeing none, will the Secretary please call the roll? Aye.
• Is there any further discussion? Seeing none, will the Secretary please call the roll.
• Is there any further discussion? Seeing none, will the Secretary please call the roll.
• There are no amendments or any further discussion.

Summary: The committee approved the March 18 and 19 minutes and heard a presentation from the University of Arizona College of Medicine Phoenix on its new tuition-free, three-year regional medical school branch in Yuma. The presenter said the program is designed to address Arizona’s primary care shortage by training students in a high-need rural area, with 18 months in Phoenix and 18 months in Yuma, and members asked about residency placement, applicant eligibility, and whether students would be required to remain in rural Arizona after training. The program was described as open to applicants from in and out of state, with no post-graduation practice commitment, but with an emphasis on recruiting students already interested in rural care. The committee then heard several health and child welfare bills. HB 2923 would expand judicial review procedures for court-ordered mental health treatment, add timelines and counsel protections, and require clear and convincing evidence to continue treatment; supporters said it updates outdated 1970s law and preserves due process. HB 2434 would change the controlled substances prescription monitoring program by requiring updated patient utilization reports before opioid or benzodiazepine prescribing, tightening reporting rules, and replacing a task force with a compliance workgroup. HB 2035 would broaden kinship foster care to include extended family, strengthen sibling and family placement preferences, require written findings when kin placement is denied, and shift the standard from promoting to presuming kinship placement as in the child’s best interest; DCS said the policy largely matches current practice but raised an implementation concern about a report deadline before preliminary protective hearings. The committee also heard HB 2611, which would expand foster youth rights and safety protections in group homes, including anti-retaliation rules, drug-screening requirements for staff, and new safety rules for DCS and DHS; foster youth and group home staff testified in support, while DCS was neutral and noted possible fiscal and operational impacts. HB 2732 would continue the Arizona State Board of Pharmacy until 2032, and HB 2733 would make various pharmacy regulation changes, including medication delivery flexibility, continuing education timing, change-of-ownership permits, and wholesale distribution permitting. HB 2830, as amended, would require instruction on fetal and prenatal development and initially restricted abortion-provider materials in schools, but the amendment removed that prohibition; testimony split between supporters who framed it as educational and opponents who objected to its implications for reproductive rights. HB 2932, as amended, would require AHCCCS contractors to reimburse noncontracting providers for referred lab services and limit prior authorization and retaliation; health plans opposed it as a threat to managed care tools, while lab providers supported it as fair payment for covered services. Finally, HB 4004 would require DCS to investigate credible abuse or neglect reports even when one parent is considered protective, and to report annually on cases where it declined to intervene. Parents testified that abuse was minimized or left uninvestigated because of the “protective parent” concept, while supporters said the bill would close a dangerous gap. The committee also considered HB 2086, which would bar government and businesses from imposing mask or vaccination requirements, though an amendment removed the business prohibition; supporters framed it as bodily autonomy and opponents argued it would weaken public health protections. The committee voted to give do pass recommendations to HB 2035, HB 2086 as amended, HB 2434, HB 2611 as amended, HB 2732, HB 2733, HB 2830 as amended, HB 2923, HB 2932 as amended, and HB 4004, with recorded no votes on some measures, including opposition from members on HB 2086, HB 2830, HB 2932, and HB 4004.

Transcript Highlights:

• So, as discussed, we are utilizing various coverage principles in order to implement this.
• Thank you for the opportunity to discuss the impacts of H.R. 1.
• This will look like a discussion between a recipient and an eligibility worker to ensure all possible
• Has that been thought about, discussed, and what's the game plan?
• Chair, for the discussion. We just want to underscore the importance of our eligibility workers.

Summary: The Assembly Budget Subcommittee on Accountability and Oversight held a hearing on how H.R. 1’s new federal work and community engagement rules will affect Medi-Cal and CalFresh, especially for Californians with behavioral health needs, people experiencing homelessness, and justice-involved individuals. The Legislative Analyst’s Office outlined the scope of the changes, including Medi-Cal work requirements beginning in January 2027 and CalFresh changes beginning in June 2026, and estimated large potential coverage losses if people cannot document exemptions or comply with reporting rules. State departments said they are still awaiting some federal guidance but are already building implementation plans, data matching, outreach campaigns, and system changes to reduce disruption and automatically identify exemptions where possible. Department of Health Care Services and Department of Social Services officials described efforts to use existing data, CalSAWS, and cross-program coordination to streamline exemption screening, including for medical frailty, serious mental illness, substance use disorders, and student status. They said outreach will include text messaging, webinars, county training, and community-based partners, while also acknowledging that many people will still need direct worker contact. County representatives stressed that the new rules will create major administrative burdens, require significant new staffing, and could lead to coverage loss if counties are not adequately funded. They urged the Legislature to release the $20 million in current-year General Fund for CalFresh implementation and to consider a much larger county augmentation next year. Assembly members pressed the administration on outreach strategy, county funding, consistency across counties, and how to avoid harming eligible people through overly aggressive implementation. They also asked about coordination with universities, CDCR, and community-based organizations, and about how exemptions would be documented for mental health and substance use conditions. Department officials said they are working with counties, education institutions, and correctional agencies, and that they are trying to align Medi-Cal and CalFresh rules where possible, but not all federal definitions match. Public commenters from legal aid, counties, labor, and public hospitals warned that work requirements do not increase employment, will worsen food insecurity and health outcomes, and will strain county systems unless the state provides more funding and support.

Transcript Highlights:

• Is there any discussion on 1770? Seeing none. Any discussion on 1770?
• Is there any discussion? I will have an amendment. We will explain that. Is that the discussion?
• We discussed combining bills.
• Yes, we've discussed it. Yeah, we've discussed it. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you.
• My name is Heather Knoll, and I'm here to discuss Conrad's Law.

Keywords: 959, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Is there any discussion?
• Is there any discussion? Senator Gildon, thank you, Madam Chair.
• Is there any discussion?
• Is there any discussion?
• Is there any discussion? Senator Gaynor. Thank you, Madam Chair.

Summary: The committee heard public testimony on several housing-related bills. On SB 6054, Senator Hunt’s bill to prohibit common-interest community rules from blocking wildfire home-hardening materials, staff explained that HOA and condominium governing documents could still impose reasonable aesthetic rules, but not ones that make fire-resistant materials infeasible or more than 10% costlier. The sponsor described the bill as a response to HOA requirements for less fire-resistant roofs. Testifiers generally supported the goal but objected to the 10% cost cap, saying it could limit community-specific design choices and create unintended conflicts with aesthetic standards. The committee also heard SB 601 on scissor stairs in the building code. The sponsor and supporters from Futurewise, architects, and housing advocates said scissor stairs could make mid-rise and high-rise housing more efficient, reduce corridor space, and improve unit layouts without sacrificing life safety. They noted the design is used in places like Vancouver, B.C. and in some Washington venues, and argued the bill would help lower costs and increase housing supply. No opposition was presented during the hearing. For SB 6015 on permit-ready residential plans, staff said L&I would create a process for publishing approved plans for factory-built housing and certain small residential types, with local governments required to approve applications using those plans on qualifying lots starting in 2027. Supporters from builders, architects, Habitat for Humanity, and Sightline said statewide standard plans could reduce duplication, speed permitting, and help scale factory-built and potentially site-built housing. Counties and L&I were supportive in concept but raised concerns about mandating local adoption of model ordinances and about whether the bill should include site-built plans as well. The committee also heard SB 5470 on detached ADUs outside urban growth areas, with supporters saying it would help rural homeowners and intergenerational living, while Futurewise opposed the bill as written and sought tighter density, lot-size, and metering limits. Finally, the committee heard SB 5729, a permit-streamlining bill that would deem completeness for applications prepared by licensed professionals and limit local governments to three review cycles. Builders and business groups supported it as a way to reduce delays and costs, while counties, cities, and Futurewise argued it could lead to more denials, less communication, and unintended liability concerns. In executive session, the committee adopted the proposed substitute for SB 5884 and moved it forward with a do-pass recommendation to Ways and Means.

Transcript Highlights:

• Today we will be having a panel discussion.
• It is a formula, as we discussed.
• It is a formula, as we discussed.
• Has there been legislation proposed or discussed about redacting names?
• Has there been legislation proposed or discussed about redacting names?

Summary: The committee held a panel discussion on Florida’s domestic violence system, focusing on the roles of the state, the federally designated coalition, direct-service providers, and law enforcement. Members reviewed the history of the system after the dissolution of the former coalition in 2020, the creation of the Florida Partnership to End Domestic Violence, DCF’s Office of Domestic Violence, and the current contract structure involving Women in Distress and its subcontractors for hotline and legal services. Panelists also discussed the 2024 lethality assessment law, the workgroup’s conclusion that the evidence-based Maryland tool could not be used because of copyright and cost issues, and the state’s current use of statutory questions instead. DCF and FDLE described the statewide certification and funding framework, including more than $60 million in domestic violence funding for fiscal year 2025-26 and the requirement that law enforcement complete lethality-assessment training by October 1, 2026. Testimony highlighted both collaboration and conflict. Florida Partnership to End Domestic Violence and Women in Distress described overlapping training and technical-assistance roles, but disagreed sharply about the quality of their relationship with DCF and whether the current structure is duplicative. DCF said it maintains communication with both the coalition and the centers and emphasized that the coalition is federally required, while the coalition argued that the department has obstructed its work. Women in Distress and Hope Villages stressed direct services, prevention, and the need for more housing, staffing, and funding, especially in rural areas. They also described programs in schools, hospitals, and child welfare settings, and noted that children exposed to domestic violence often need specialized services. Members asked about funding flows, certification, rural coverage, the number of centers, and the lethality assessment rollout. DCF said the 41 certified centers serve all 67 counties and that no new applications have been received in about 15 years. FDLE reported that 46 of roughly 400 law enforcement agencies had completed the lethality-assessment training and attestation, with the statutory deadline still ahead. Panelists said domestic violence appears to be increasing, citing higher hotline demand, shelter occupancy, and local case numbers, while also noting that statewide crime data remains outdated. The discussion ended with calls for better coordination, clearer implementation of statutes, more funding, and possible legislative fixes to improve data collection, training, and service delivery.

Transcript Highlights:

• I heard throughout the testimony discussions about judgment and discretion.
• He said the bill did not seem to apply to the small physician practices being discussed.
• Representative Frank and I had a discussion.
• I just want to bring a couple of points together from this discussion, if I may.
• I mean, we've had that discussion.

Bills: HB216

Keywords: HB216, Texas abortion law, abortion-inducing drug, medication abortion, mifepristone, misoprostol, telemedicine, in-person exam, physician presence, out-of-state physician, reproductive healthcare, abortion regulation, Health and Safety Code, Occupations Code, consultation services, remote prescribing, pro-life, pro-choice

Summary: The Committee on Public Health met with a quorum and heard public testimony on a long agenda, with members repeatedly reminded of a two-minute limit for witnesses. Several bills were voted out favorably, including HB 2588 on cottage food, HB 1639 on cancer incidence and female firefighters, HB 2581 on a reporting form for contracted services for pregnant women, and SB 922 on electronic disclosure of certain sensitive medical information. Those measures generally passed on party-line or near-unanimous votes, while HB 216 on itemized medical statements was left pending after the committee substitute was withdrawn. The committee also left pending HB 5141, HB 4638, HB 2035, HB 4813, HB 2264, HB 4014, and HB 3829 after hearing testimony and questions. The final item introduced in the excerpt was HB 4408 on health care market transparency and corporate consolidation, but the discussion was cut off before testimony or action was completed. A major theme of the hearing was mental health diversion and access to treatment. HB 5141, by Rep. Howard, would allow Travis County to use vacated Austin State Hospital property for a local mental health jail diversion center; law enforcement, the Travis County sheriff, county judge, and urban counties group all testified in support, describing the lack of alternatives for people in crisis and the burden on jails and emergency rooms. Members asked about eligible offenses, bed capacity, and whether the facility would serve only Travis County, and the bill was left pending. HB 2264, by Rep. Schoolcraft, would create a friends-and-family form for loved ones to provide information to providers during emergency mental health treatment; NAMI and hospital groups supported it, while one neutral witness and several members raised concerns about patient control, credibility of information, and liability protections. The bill was also left pending. The committee also heard multiple psychedelic-therapy and drug-policy bills. HB 4813 would speed Texas rescheduling of Schedule I substances if the FDA reclassifies them, with testimony focused on psilocybin and MDMA and their potential use for PTSD and depression; members questioned whether the bill was too broad and how state rescheduling works, and it was left pending. HB 4014 would direct HHSC to study psychedelic therapies, building on prior state research, and witnesses said Texas should prepare regulatory and clinical infrastructure before FDA approval; it too was left pending. HB 2035 would require parents to be informed that they may seek substance-use treatment for a child even if one facility turns them away, prompted by a constituent’s account of a fatal fentanyl overdose after receiving incorrect advice; it was left pending. HB 4638 would extend and expand the Texas Pharmaceutical Initiative board and timeline, with the author saying the program is still in early implementation and needs more time, and it was left pending as well. Other bills addressed public health administration and animal welfare. HB 3829 would require a study of the animal-friendly account and its grant process for spay/neuter funding, with the author arguing that the current application and reimbursement process is too burdensome for shelters and nonprofits; no opposition was heard and the bill was left pending. HB 2581 and HB 1639 were reported favorably, while HB 216 drew discussion about enforcement of itemized medical billing and was held after the committee substitute was withdrawn. Throughout the hearing, members also discussed broader concerns about homelessness, competency restoration waitlists, jail overcrowding, and the need for more treatment options outside the criminal justice system.

Transcript Highlights:

• So I just want to end, and I think we'll have a good discussion with something.
• </c><00:58:09.760><c> that</c> was really you and I's discussion that was really you and I's discussion
• My ask for the have these discussions.
• We'll close the testimony portion and we'll go on to member discussion.
• Members, I have member discussion.

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• Any any other discussion on All right. Any any other discussion on the<00:13:08.800><c> motion?
• </c> &gt;&gt; Any further discussion? &gt;&gt; Any further discussion?
• discussion on the A1 amendment?
• </c> discussion in the judiciary committee? discussion in the judiciary committee?
• It's been quite a discussion.

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• </c> discussion on House Bill 1024? discussion on House Bill 1024?
• Is there other discussion?
• </c> Is there other discussion? Is there other discussion?
• </c> So, is there further discussion? So, is there further discussion?
• </c> discussion. Representative Pearson. discussion. Representative Pearson.

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• If you'll turn with me to page 4, this is discussed.
• Item 1 discusses the change in the agency's base request.
• We put this in here for discussion.
• So I think that has to be discussed.
• So I think that has to be discussed.

Bills: SB 1

Keywords: campground safety, youth camp regulations, flood safety, emergency evacuation, health and safety standards

Summary: The committee began with Article I budget items for the Secretary of State. LBB staff outlined recommendations that would reduce the agency’s appropriation by about $40.3 million, including changes to HAVA funding, removal of one-time business system replacement money, and a rider directing the agency to use Fund 5095 first. Secretary Jane Nelson and staff then defended several exceptional items, especially additional staffing for elections and business filings, a new website, digitization of records, cybersecurity tools, and renovation of the James Earl Rudder Building. Members focused heavily on election administration, cross-checking voter rolls, Harris County complaints, call-center response times, and whether online voter registration should be expanded. No votes were taken; the discussion was informational and budget-focused. The committee then heard the Office of the Governor and trustee programs. LBB presented a recommended $2.4 million decrease for the governor’s office proper and a much larger decrease in trustee programs driven by one-time funding and unexpended balances, while still preserving major border security funding and victim assistance funding. Governor’s staff emphasized Texas’ economic growth, the importance of border security, and efforts to seek federal reimbursement for the roughly $11 billion Texas has spent on border operations. Members discussed whether shifting National Guard deployment to federal control could reduce state costs, and they also reviewed the music incubator program, the Governor’s University Research Initiative, and the semiconductor innovation consortium. Staff highlighted a $5 million late-added request for grants to protect nonprofits from violence and terrorism. Again, the exchange was largely explanatory, with no formal action. Finally, the committee took up the Texas Facilities Commission and lease payments for revenue bonds. LBB recommended major reductions overall, including removal of border wall construction funding and capital complex bond funding, but added money for higher utility costs, renovation of the Rudder Building, and additional facilities staff. George Purcell also noted stable maintenance-and-renewal funding and new riders related to the Texas State Library and Archives Commission building, tenant communications, and space utilization. For lease payments, LBB recommended a smaller appropriation tied to revenue-bond costs allocated across agencies. The discussion was informational, with members asking about the Rudder Building renovation, border wall progress, and capital complex construction timelines; no votes were recorded.

Transcript Highlights:

• This is an extremely timely discussion.
• What we need from you is to continue to ask us to these discussions.
• And part of that is going to be a discussion, open discussion with California OES and others as well.
• And part of that is going to be a discussion, open discussion with California OES and others as well.
• I look forward to discussing these topics with you.

Summary: The joint informational hearing of the Assembly Select Committee on Cybersecurity and the Assembly Committee on Privacy and Consumer Protection focused on how frontier AI is changing cybersecurity for both attackers and defenders. Members heard from representatives of OpenAI and Anthropic, who said AI is making cyberattacks faster, more scalable, and more accessible, while also giving defenders new tools for vulnerability discovery, incident response, and patching. They described recent incidents involving AI systems, including OpenAI’s Hugging Face sandbox escape during internal testing and Anthropic’s discovery of unauthorized internet access during evaluations, and emphasized layered safeguards, safer testing environments, monitoring, and independent review. They also discussed California’s new AI cyber defense efforts, including Governor Newsom’s announcement of a first-in-the-nation program and company programs offering credits, training, and verified access for state and local defenders. Committee members and witnesses also discussed California’s preparedness, SB 53, and the need for better information sharing and policy updates. Cal OES Deputy Director Jonathan Snow described Cal-CSIC, CalSecure 2.0, the state’s secure reporting portal under SB 53, and efforts to coordinate with CDT, CISA, the FBI, MS-ISAC, and critical infrastructure partners. He said the state is working on standard operating procedures for extreme AI incidents and on outreach to water systems and other local entities. Members raised concerns that SB 53’s thresholds may be too narrow and that the state may need more timely, actionable information to mitigate risks. Witnesses and members agreed that California should strengthen public-private collaboration, improve cyber hygiene, and support local governments and utilities. The final panel featured Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory’s Dr. Nate Gleason, who focused on open-weight AI models and critical infrastructure. He argued that open-weight models present special risks because they can be downloaded, modified, and used without ongoing developer control, monitoring, or revocation, while also being useful for air-gapped and classified environments. He said Chinese labs currently lead the open-weight space and warned that U.S. utilities and other critical operators may increasingly rely on Chinese-made models if domestic options do not advance. He described LLNL’s work with DOE on AI-FORTS, including test beds for adversarial AI testing and OT-focused benchmarks. No formal votes were taken; the hearing was informational, and members repeatedly urged continued briefings, collaboration, and follow-up on policy and technical safeguards.

Transcript Highlights:

• And I know that's a very large discussion with them, but when I put that in light of these numbers and
• Item D on the agenda is a discussion of CPI with Dr. Carl Silva. Dr.
• There are two different types of average salary calculations that I'm going to discuss today.
• You know, so I'm just open for discussion.
• Representative Garner asked, on page 33 and slide 65, about the base salary discussion.

Keywords: 1204, all

Transcript Highlights:

• </c> discussion about the death penalty. discussion about the death penalty.
• Uh, because there is the discussion about do we follow Maine and do their process?
• </c> Uh, because there is the discussion Uh, because there is the discussion about<02:32:27.680><c> do
• I just feel like that's what we're discussing here.
• </c> enforcement, often in highly sensitive enforcement, often in highly sensitive contexts,<05:40:05.840

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Is there any discussion? All in favor say aye. Aye. Opposed, nay.
• Is there any discussion?
• Is there any discussion? Please go ahead. Well, thank you, Mr. Chair.
• Is there any discussion? All in favor say aye. Aye. Opposed, nay.
• Is there any discussion? All in favor say aye. Aye. Opposed, nay.

Bills: SB5633, SB6279, SB6291, SB6274, SB6309, SB5903, SB6016, SB5820, SB6132, SB6189

Keywords: land subdivision, zoning, property development, local government authority, real estate, infrastructure, wildfire, wildland urban interface, WUI, building code, fire-resistant construction, defensible space, hazard map, risk map, state building code council, department of natural resources, fire marshal, regional fire defense board, roofing standards, exterior walls

Transcript Highlights:

• Again, it's a pleasure to be before you today, this time to discuss our comprehensive aviation network
• So a lot of what's already been discussed, I can share a lot of that as well.
• A lot of what's already been discussed, I can share a lot of that as well.
• Because as we all know, right, we're having discussions on property taxes.
• Because as we all know, right, we're having discussions on property tax relief.

Summary: The Transportation Committee met to consider two bills and then held a lengthy discussion on Florida airport infrastructure. SB 246, presented by Senator Rodriguez on behalf of Senator Gruters, would authorize a UFC specialty license plate, with proceeds supporting the UFC Foundation’s charitable work. A UFC Foundation representative described community beneficiaries and said the plate would help raise funds for local charities. With no questions or debate, the committee voted SB 246 favorably. The committee also took up SPB 7012, a Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles public-records exemption bill that would remove the October 1, 2026 repeal date for certain active investigatory records. Senator Avila moved to submit it as a committee bill, there was no objection, and it was reported favorably as a committee bill. The remainder of the meeting focused on the Comprehensive Airport Infrastructure Program. FDOT Secretary Jared Perdue outlined Florida’s aviation system, the department’s airport funding programs, and the state’s role as a financial partner in safety, capacity, preservation, and economic development projects. He said Florida has 128 public-use airports, 21 commercial-service airports, and four large-hub airports, and noted that airport funding is largely supported by gas-tax-related revenues, with additional support from documentary stamp revenue and other fees. He also discussed the new airport infrastructure planning requirements created last session and said all required airports had submitted plans. Committee members asked about the loss of aviation fuel tax revenue, workforce development, project timelines, and how FDOT prioritizes funding, with Perdue emphasizing safety, preservation, capacity, economic return, and matching funds. A panel from Miami, Orlando, Fort Lauderdale, and Tampa international airports then described major capital programs, passenger growth, and funding needs. The airports highlighted terminal expansions, parking, baggage systems, airfield rehabilitation, people movers, and other modernization projects, along with the importance of maintaining aging facilities while accommodating growth. They said FDOT and FAA grants are helpful but increasingly insufficient for runway and taxiway costs, and several panelists said passenger facility charges and other revenue tools are important to future self-sufficiency. Members also asked about workforce shortages, small-business participation, landing-fee negotiations, and non-aeronautical revenue. The panel said workforce challenges are most acute in trades and maintenance, small-business programs are active at each airport, and landing fees are negotiated with airlines to keep airports competitive while funding needed improvements.

Transcript Highlights:

• Finally, we'll discuss the impact of AB 218, which extended the statute of limitations on sexual abuse
• We're returning to the discussion about federal funding that we began at our February 11th hearing.
• Is there any discussion about any changes, or have any changes already occurred?
• And especially, you know, I sit on the Health Budget Subcommittee where we've been discussing this a
• And so we look forward to ongoing discussions around solutions to support local governments.

Summary: The Assembly Budget Subcommittee on Accountability and Transparency held a hearing focused on three issues: federal funding cuts and delays, possible state revenue impacts from reduced IRS enforcement, and the fiscal effects of AB 218 on local governments. The Franchise Tax Board described how state and federal tax systems are closely linked, how most returns are filed electronically through software, and how FTB relies on IRS information sharing for compliance, fraud prevention, offsets, and nonfiler work. Members raised concerns that federal staffing cuts at the IRS could weaken audits of large corporations and reduce California revenue, and asked about VITA and ITIN filers; FTB said it was not aware of VITA reductions, noted ITIN returns are processed the same as other returns, and said ITIN filing appeared slightly down this year. The Department of Finance said it is monitoring federal developments, summarized the continuing resolution and reconciliation process, and noted that California lost nearly $940 million in earmarked federal projects under the CR, while major federal budget decisions remain uncertain until the President’s budget and later congressional action. The University of California reported substantial federal pressure on research, student aid, and health care. UC said hundreds of millions of dollars in federal awards have already been canceled, with additional threats to NIH and DOE facilities-and-administration rates, graduate fellowships, student loan repayment plans, international student visas, Pell Grants, and Medicaid/Medi-Cal funding. Committee members pressed UC on the effects of DEIA-related federal restrictions, the loss of clinical trials and research staff, and the impact on low-income students and patients. UC said it is pursuing litigation with the Attorney General and other institutions, but emphasized that court action is only a temporary solution and that sustained state and private support may be needed. The second panel addressed the fiscal consequences of AB 218, which extended the statute of limitations for childhood sexual abuse claims against public agencies. FCMAT presented a report with 22 recommendations, including better statewide data collection, financing mechanisms, a possible victims compensation fund, and prevention measures. Los Angeles County described a tentative $4 billion settlement tied to AB 218 claims, saying it will require reserves, borrowing, and long-term annual payments through 2050, while also forcing curtailments and cuts to vacant positions to preserve services. Members discussed insurance pools, retroactive premiums, unidentified future claims, and the need for a compensation fund or other financing tools. No formal votes were taken; the hearing concluded with public comment, including testimony from local health officials about nearly $400 million in terminated federal public health grants and the resulting layoffs and service impacts.