Transcript Highlights:

• MMIP grant funding.
• not just in vertical prosecution grants, but grants of all kinds, dealing with both federal and state
• It's ironic the way it was communicated, and we're talking about a communication system.
• And there's been no communication.
• The Wright Grant funds community-based organizations that work with individuals inside prison and often

Summary: Assembly Budget Subcommittee No. 6 heard the Governor’s May Revision proposals for the judicial branch, the Board of State and Community Corrections, the Department of Justice, and the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation. The Legislative Analyst’s Office opened with a warning that the state budget remains structurally imbalanced and urged the Legislature to avoid new ongoing spending unless offset by reductions elsewhere. In the judicial branch discussion, the Judicial Council highlighted language access funding, appellate court security, a backfill for the state court facilities construction fund, and an extension of the lactation room mandate; Finance supported most items but suggested reporting language on interpreter costs and reducing the General Fund backfill. Members raised concerns about judicial vacancies, long-term salary freezes, remote hearings, and the lack of progress on court staffing in some counties. For the Board of State and Community Corrections, the administration proposed $10 million one-time each for the Missing and Murdered Indigenous People grant program and a human trafficking vertical prosecution grant program. The LAO said both should be weighed against other priorities and suggested the Legislature consider whether the Tribal Nations Grant Fund could support MMIP work, while Finance said it preferred General Fund support and wanted more review before any fund swap. Members strongly supported MMIP funding and asked whether ongoing support would be considered. On the human trafficking grant, Finance said BSC was a good fit because of its grant administration experience and prior vertical prosecution work, while legislators asked why the program was not placed with the Office of Emergency Services as originally contemplated in prior legislation. The Department of Justice presented antitrust litigation funding, Medi-Cal Fraud and Elder Abuse staffing, completion of organized retail criminal enterprise cases, and trailer bill language for a continuous appropriation from the Victims of Consumer Fraud Restitution Fund. The LAO supported the antitrust account use but questioned the Unfair Competition Law Fund’s ability to cover the full request without General Fund repayment, and recommended against a continuous appropriation for the restitution fund in favor of a more limited mechanism with legislative oversight. Finance said the fund would remain solvent and defended the continuous appropriation as necessary to pay victims promptly. In the CDCR portion, the largest discussion centered on the Boston Consulting Group efficiency review and sharply reduced savings estimates; LAO said the department had not fully explained the proposed position eliminations or future $100 million savings target, while Finance said the work reflected deeper analysis and ongoing efforts to find savings. Members repeatedly pressed CDCR and Finance on the gap between earlier promised savings and the revised figures. CDCR also outlined population projections showing continued declines in prison and parole populations, while LAO again urged the state to close an additional prison to save ongoing costs. The department then walked through several May Revision items, including workers’ compensation funding, a Corcoran honor housing dorm, incarcerated firefighter pay implementation, an incarcerated menopause program, mental health receiver staffing, mental health resource teams and crisis intervention teams, medical classification staffing changes, and AI note-taking for the electronic health record. LAO generally recommended limiting-term funding and more reporting for many of these proposals, while Finance defended them as necessary ongoing investments or court-ordered obligations. Members questioned the cost of workers’ compensation, the need for more prison closures, the lack of funding for women’s facility violence prevention, and the timing and transparency of the BCG savings process. No votes were taken.

Transcript Highlights:

• Existing community schools will continue to be funded by the one-time implementation grants and be able
• The community schools are really important to meeting the community.
• five-year grants.
• community is critical to a successful community schools approach.
• the program. 45 NCB schools have already received grants that are providing community services to 26,000

Summary: The Assembly Budget Subcommittee on Education Finance held a hearing on the Governor’s proposal to convert the California Community Schools Partnership Program from a one-time grant model into an ongoing $1 billion Proposition 98 program. Finance and CDE described the expansion as a way to sustain existing community schools and add thousands more, with county offices, regional/state technical assistance centers, annual self-certification, and a future accreditation process intended to support fidelity to the state framework. The LAO opposed shifting to an ongoing categorical program and recommended continuing one-time grants, while suggesting longer-term funding for technical assistance and, if ongoing funding is adopted, stronger planning, reporting, phased expansion, and clearer accreditation timelines. Committee members pressed the administration on how the new proposal could fund far more schools with less money than the original $4.1 billion program, how much of the funding would go to existing cohorts versus new schools, and whether the proposal sufficiently requires planning and implementation before funds are received. Testimony from practitioners and advocates largely supported ongoing funding but emphasized that money alone is not enough. Speakers from LPI, CTA, San Diego Unified, Fresno County, the Partnership for the Future of Learning, and Sacramento County urged stronger requirements for shared governance, explicit commitment to the community schools framework, annual reporting beginning in year one, and continued or expanded support for coordinators and technical assistance. Several witnesses said the proposal should better protect county office coordination roles, maintain preferences for partnerships in the technical assistance structure, and ensure the system can support more than 6,000 schools. Others highlighted the need for specialized supports for middle and high schools, better integration with other state programs such as ELOP, universal meals, TK, and the LCFF equity multiplier, and more detailed accountability and accreditation processes. No formal vote was taken during the portion of the hearing reflected in the transcript. The chair indicated that the committee wanted additional information on the funding breakdown, the use of reverted funds, and the proposed support structure before taking action, and administration witnesses said a more detailed proposal would be brought forward in the May Revise.

Transcript Highlights:

• Existing community schools will continue to be funded by the one-time implementation grants and be able
• community schools.
• That community continues to grow with new community schools each year.
• Forty-five NCB schools have already received grants that are providing community services to 26,000 students
• Forty-five NCB schools have already received grants that are providing community services to 26,000 students

Transcript Highlights:

• They have a grant from the U.S.
• There's a matching requirement, and then there's a grant agreement in the same way we would do a grant
• So it's not a grant directly to the community.
• These are federal grants.
• These are federal grants.

Committee: All JBC-PEER REVIEW

Transcript Highlights:

• Since then, it's really been focused on implementation and expansion grants.
• They are receiving, these low-income students are receiving some form of Pell Grant, Federal Pell Grant
• So the Computer Science Supplementary Authorization Incentive Grant provides one-time grant awards of
• Investing in teachers ultimately strengthens communities.
• That’s why the Golden State Teacher Grant Program is so critical.

Transcript Highlights:

• The next line item is the disaster recovery community development block grants.
• These are your funds for, for example, infrastructure and mitigation grants for communities that were
• The next line item is the disaster recovery community development block grants.
• These are your funds for, for example, for infrastructure and mitigation grants for communities that
• These are extra funds that our rural communities need because rural communities, typically speaking,

Bills: S0048

Committee: Senate Appropriations Committee on Transportation, Tourism, and Economic Development

Summary: The Appropriations Committee on Transportation, Tourism, and Economic Development heard the Governor’s proposed FY 2026-27 budget for the TED silo and presentations from Commerce, Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles, Military Affairs, the State Guard, State, Transportation, and Emergency Management. The Governor’s office outlined a $117.4 billion overall budget, including $18.3 billion for TED agencies, with major allocations for FDOT, Commerce, emergency management, tourism, military affairs, and state operations. Agency heads emphasized priorities such as housing and disaster recovery, workforce and rural infrastructure, law enforcement recruitment, defense support, tourism marketing, aerospace and spaceport investment, election audits, historic preservation, road and bridge maintenance, aviation safety, and emergency preparedness systems. Members asked several questions about the use and effectiveness of funding. Visit Florida officials said the public-private match is essential and that they exceeded the required match last year. Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles discussed trooper pay, vehicle replacement, aviation support, and transparency tools such as vehicle camera systems, with senators praising the department’s recruitment efforts. Military Affairs and the State Guard described readiness, recruiting, facility construction, and support for domestic missions, including hurricane response and perimeter security at the Everglades detention site; questions focused on deployment tempo, staffing, and costs. The Department of State explained funding for automated election audits, a conservation lab, and historic preservation, and said its arts grant changes were intended to standardize scoring rather than cut programs. Transportation highlighted a $15.4 billion total budget, major work program funding, safety initiatives, seaport and aviation investments, and the elimination of Florida Rail Enterprise funding due to reduced documentary stamp revenues. The committee also heard and passed CS/SB 48 by Senator Gates, which requires local governments to allow accessory dwelling units on a voluntary basis, while preserving local authority over setbacks, construction, and permitting. An amendment removed reusable tenant screening reports and clarified that conforming ADUs are allowed by right without separate hearings. The Florida Restaurant and Lodging Association and several industry and business groups supported the bill, citing the need for long-term rental housing for workers. After debate, the committee adopted the amendment and reported the bill favorably by roll call vote.

Transcript Highlights:

• </c> needed to do without Community Partners needed to do without Community Partners so<00:07:41.360>
• <c> it</c><00:07:46.479><c> was</c> thing with the Community Partners it was thing with the Community
• She received a $31,000 grant. You can see she used that grant to wrap her vehicle.
• On the grant side of things, we received 8,815 applications. We were able to give out 45 grants.
• Development and Community initiatives uh on<01:20:33.199><c> the</c><01:20:33.320><c> grant</c><01:20

Committee: Senate Jobs and Economic Development

Transcript Highlights:

• </c> probably do that as well, but the grant probably do that as well, but the grant will<00:10:20.640
• The grant person as a city employee.
• development block grant or other grant program. >> Right.
• And so that's community development block grant. That's the HUD program, right? >> CDBG, right?
• And so that's so community development<00:11:49.519><c> block</c><00:11:49.760><c> grant.

Committee: House County and Municipal Government

Transcript Highlights:

• Teacher Grant.
• Participation in this grant was open to both colleges and universities as well as community partners
• We've also, in addition to this grant, continued to partner with the Institute on Community Integration
• training grants um provide our dual training grants um provide grants<00:54:20.760><c> to</c><00:54:
• available to institutions and grant available to institutions and community-<01:05:13.440><c> based<

Committee: Senate Higher Education

Transcript Highlights:

• We have other grants.
• Bismarck-Mandan is a large community. We are a sister community.
• And this on the left side would show the amount in millions of grant, total grants obtained.
• secure the grants.
• And this is a two-year grant.

Summary: The committee first reviewed the 2024-25 tuition waiver report for the North Dakota University System. Staff explained that waivers were reported for degree-seeking students and broken out by residency, institution, and waiver type. Members asked about partial versus full waivers, institutional discretion, athletic waivers, and whether campuses have published guardrails or transparency requirements. Staff said most waivers are set by institutions, with some statutory and board-required categories, and that athletic waivers are a small share of total waiver dollars. The report showed total gross tuition of $354.5 million, tuition waived of $38.9 million, and 11,193 of 42,040 students receiving some waiver. Members also discussed how waivers affect net tuition revenue, housing and food collections, and whether campuses are using waivers strategically compared with scholarships and other funding sources. The committee then heard a presentation on tuition rates by campus and State Board policy. Staff explained the board’s tuition factors for resident, Minnesota reciprocity, contiguous-state/U.S. nonresident, and international students, and noted that campuses often seek exceptions based on program-specific competition and enrollment goals. Members asked whether rates are based on cost or competition, and staff said campuses typically bring forward estimates and market comparisons when requesting special rates. The presentation also reviewed general fund appropriations versus net tuition revenue by campus, and members discussed how local tuition decisions and waivers do not directly affect the state funding formula, though they do affect institutional revenue and reserves. Questions were also raised about the Higher Learning Commission’s financial composite indicator and how it differs from the more intuitive reserve and revenue figures. The committee next received a broad overview of non-higher-education entities affiliated with the State Board of Higher Education, beginning with NDSU agriculture-related units. Dr. Greg Lardy described the State Board of Agricultural Research and Education, the NDSU Extension Service, the Agricultural Experiment Station, and the branch research centers, emphasizing their statewide role in crop and livestock research, extension education, and county-based outreach. He outlined funding mixes for extension, the experiment station, and branch stations, noting that grants and contracts support both research and education, while the agronomy seed farm is self-funded through seed sales. Members asked about the new and vacant FTE pool, R1 research status, matching requirements for grants, and whether state appropriations count toward research expenditures. Dr. Lardy also highlighted major research impacts, including crop varieties, virtual fencing, AI-assisted weed control, and NDAWN weather data. The Northern Crops Institute and the Upper Great Plains Transportation Institute also presented. NCI described its role in market development, technical services, and education for regional agriculture, its governance through the Northern Crops Council, and its funding from state appropriations, other states, and earned revenue. Members asked about the source of out-of-state funding, intellectual property, and the institute’s international reach. UGPTI then outlined its transportation research, federal and state funding structure, and work on road and bridge condition assessments, travel demand modeling, and workforce training. No votes were taken during the portion of the meeting reflected in the transcript.

Transcript Highlights:

• They hope they can help those communities going forward.
• They hope they can help those communities going forward.
• Back to the $305 million: the community can use funding too, and any federal grant.
• That FSIG grant enabled us to buy a van and move food around.
• are priorities for their communities.

Committee: Joint Joint Committee on Bonding, Capital Expenditures and State Assets

Summary: The Joint Committee on Bonding, Capital Expenditures and State Assets held a hearing on S. 2542, the Mass Ready Act, the Healey-Driscoll administration’s environmental bond bill. Secretary of Energy and Environmental Affairs Rebecca Tepper and Undersecretary Jen Sullivan described the bill as a $3 billion resilience package to protect drinking water, farms, fisheries, roads, bridges, parks, and communities from flooding, heat, drought, wildfires, and other climate impacts. They highlighted major authorizations for flood and coastal resilience, DCR infrastructure, drinking water and wastewater upgrades, PFAS remediation, open space and land protection, food security infrastructure, and a new Resilience Revolving Fund for low-cost loans to municipalities, tribes, and water districts. Committee members asked about project lifespans, flood and salt marsh permitting, wastewater and combined sewer overflow funding, parkway maintenance, land acquisition priorities, Quabbin stewardship, and how the revolving fund would be capitalized and administered. The administration said the fund would be modeled on the Clean Water Trust, use existing trust resources rather than new fees, and could later support special obligation bonds; they also said the bill would streamline certain permitting and improve flood-risk disclosure and climate-related building standards. Many witnesses urged the committee to strengthen the bill’s funding levels or add related policy provisions. Labor, contractor, and plumbing groups supported creating a water reuse and graywater recycling commission, saying it could conserve water, reduce stormwater and sewer burdens, and create skilled jobs. Boston Harbor Now asked for higher authorizations for the Municipal Vulnerability Preparedness program and resilient coast work, plus permitting reforms for nature-based and waterfront projects. The Massachusetts Rivers Alliance backed the bill but also urged inclusion of drought-management legislation, a water reuse commission, a statewide flood buyout program, and more support for community resiliency. Environmental justice advocates from Green Roots called for dedicated funding for outdoor and indoor air quality monitoring and indoor air quality improvements in schools and public housing, while conservation and tree advocates sought larger investments in urban forestry, local nurseries, and workforce training, along with clearer language to ensure municipal reforestation funds go to cities and towns. Agricultural and food system witnesses emphasized the importance of the bill’s food security and farmland provisions. The Southeastern Massachusetts Agricultural Partnership and the Mass Food System Collaborative supported the $125 million food security infrastructure grant program, saying it has funded critical facilities and equipment for farmers, fishers, processors, and food access organizations, but warned that without the bill there could be a funding gap in fiscal year 2027. They also supported farmland protection and asked for more funding for agricultural capital programs, used-equipment eligibility in grant programs, and a next-generation farmer fund. Water utility representatives said the bill still falls short of the state’s long-term drinking water, wastewater, and stormwater needs, citing EPA estimates of nearly $37 billion in needed investments over 20 years and urging dedicated recurring funding and broader eligibility for climate resilience grants. No votes were taken at the hearing.

Transcript Highlights:

• , Native American, and LGBTQ+ communities. ...communities.
• One $20 million grant focused on children ages 0 to 5 is about to be awarded to six community-based organizations
• This includes providing grants for community-based organizations that conduct medically accurate and
• Providing grants for community-based organizations that conduct medically accurate and culturally competent
• community.

Transcript Highlights:

• MMIP grant funding.
• MMP grant funding.
• It's ironic the way it was communicated, and we're talking about a communication system.
• The Wright Grant funds community-based organizations...
• The Wright Grant funds community-based organizations that work with individuals inside prison and often

Transcript Highlights:

• by Grant Central, that we fully called a fully integrated application. ...part managed by Grant Central
• for communities.
• We've heard from many communities about the difficulties that they may have in applying for their grants
• It's not an existing grant or expansion of a grant.
• This is a tremendous boost to our community.

Committee: Joint Joint Committee on Transportation

Summary: The Transportation Committee heard testimony on House Bill 4987, the Healey-Driscoll administration’s transportation bond bill financing long-term improvements to municipal roads and bridges. Administration officials said the bill would authorize more than $5 billion overall, including $1.2 billion for Chapter 90 over four years, $500 million for accelerated road and bridge repairs, $200 million for MBTA rail modernization and reliability, $200 million for transportation projects supporting housing development, $200 million for a new DCR parkway resilience and safety program, and reauthorizations for federal-aid highway projects, non-federal highway projects, municipal pavement, and Shared Streets and Spaces. They emphasized that the proposal is backed by Commonwealth Transportation Fund revenues, including registry fees, gas tax, and Fair Share surtax revenue, and said it would improve safety, reliability, housing production, and regional equity. Committee members asked about the four-year Chapter 90 authorization, the housing-related transportation funding, federal funding uncertainty, and how the MBTA money would support commuter rail electrification and regional rail. Administration witnesses said the multi-year structure would help municipalities plan and avoid more expensive deferred maintenance, that the housing funds would be flexible for infrastructure needs tied to development, and that the state is pursuing federal grants while relying on state-backed capital financing. They also described process improvements at MassDOT that have reduced project bid-to-notice timelines by 60% and said the rail modernization funds would support locomotive procurement, including battery-electric and Tier 4 diesel locomotives. The Massachusetts Municipal Association and local officials from Sherborn, Conway, and Yarmouth strongly supported the bill, saying the increased Chapter 90 funding and road-mile formula have made a major difference for small and rural communities and that four-year funding would improve predictability, project bundling, and cost savings. They cited local road, bridge, culvert, and gravel-road needs and urged favorable action. A Better City and MAPC also supported the bill but urged the committee to use it for broader transportation policy changes and new revenue tools, including possible reforms to TNC fees, regional pricing, and other funding mechanisms. The committee took no vote during the hearing and adjourned after testimony.

Transcript Highlights:

• program, the Prop 64 grant program, and also the organized retail theft grant programs.
• I'm deputy director of the grants division at the Board of State and Community Corrections.
• Not only have the numbers of grants grown, but the complexity of our grants has changed.”
• Our biggest grants—Prop 47, Prop 64, the Cannabis Grant, and the California Violence Intervention and
• Prevention Grant—are continuously appropriated grants.

Summary: The subcommittee heard an overview from the Board of State and Community Corrections on its budget change proposal for 11 additional permanent positions, which BSCC said are needed to manage a rapidly expanded grant workload, increase technical assistance, and strengthen oversight and audits. BSCC also updated members on its new In Custody Death Review Division, created under SB 519, reporting that it has begun collecting and reviewing local jail death investigations, has hired about one-third of its staff, and has received access to medical records and related documents. Members raised concerns about family notification practices, local jail deaths, and whether BSCC’s increased administrative use would reduce grant dollars; BSCC said the change is intended to be permanent but should not substantially affect local assistance. The LAO supported the position authority request but flagged a methodological issue in the administration’s Proposition 47 savings estimate, and Finance said it would update the estimate by May Revision. The committee then reviewed CDCR’s overall budget, population, and facility issues. The Secretary said the incarcerated population is holding around 90,000, parole around 33,000, and described major cost pressures from retirements, workers’ compensation, medical transport, violence, and aging infrastructure lacking air conditioning and ADA features. He defended prison closures as creating overcrowding and reducing programming capacity, while also highlighting successes such as declining recidivism, expanded college and reentry programming, and the completion of the San Quentin Rehabilitation Center. Members pressed CDCR on fiscal discipline, the effect of closures on savings, community impacts from prison shutdowns, vacancy and staffing issues, and climate-related facility needs. CDCR said it clusters medically vulnerable and ADA-needing populations at more suitable facilities, uses heat plans and temperature monitoring, and is developing a 20-year infrastructure plan. A separate item addressed CDCR’s request for $91 million ongoing for lump-sum leave payouts for correctional officers and nurses. CDCR said these costs have historically been covered by vacancy savings, but declining vacancies and facility closures have reduced that source. The LAO said the funding is reasonable in the near term but recommended limited-term approval with reporting, and urged the Legislature to scrutinize unallocated savings assumptions and the ongoing Boston Consulting Group efficiency contract. Finance argued the lump-sum request should be ongoing because the costs are recurring and vacancy savings are less reliable. Members questioned whether CDCR is doing enough to reduce leave liability and whether the department will actually achieve the budgeted savings from the consultant work. Finally, CDCR presented updated population projections through June 2030, estimating a 6.5 percent decline in the institution population and a 10.4 percent decline in parole, while revising its Proposition 36 methodology based on actual admissions data. CDCR said Prop. 36 admissions are increasing but at a lower level than previously projected, and that the law’s long-term effects remain uncertain. On the California Rehabilitation Center closure, CDCR projected about $99.6 million in net General Fund savings next year and roughly $150 million ongoing, with 522 positions eliminated. The LAO said the state could close another prison within a few years and identified the Correctional Training Facility in Soledad as a strong candidate, recommending against approving new capital projects there unless another closure is identified. Finance said the administration has not proposed any additional closure at this time.

Transcript Highlights:

• Number two, it provides an additional $50,000 in grant funding.
• And I think when the community is able to see their young graduates, students go into the community colleges
• Grant Program if approved?
• I am a recipient of the Golden State Teacher Grant, and this grant transformed my life by removing financial
• Thank you. for the Golden State Teacher Grant Program.

Summary: The Senate Budget Subcommittee on Education heard the Governor’s proposals on dual enrollment, reading difficulty screeners, special education, school facilities, and Commission on Teacher Credentialing programs. On dual enrollment, the Department of Finance described a $100 million one-time Proposition 98 investment to expand the Dual Enrollment Opportunities Grant Program, along with changes to make regional occupational centers eligible, add funding for justice-involved youth, prioritize higher-need LEAs, support teacher professional development, and reduce daily instructional minute requirements for some dual enrollment students. The LAO recommended rejecting the new funding as not clearly addressing implementation barriers, while CDE supported the proposal and suggested reserving $10 million for technical assistance. Committee members and public commenters generally supported the expansion, with some asking for technical assistance and broader access, including adult dual enrollment. The committee also reviewed a $40 million one-time Proposition 98 proposal for reading difficulty screener implementation and related trailer bill language that would require screening after 91 school days for kindergarten and 46 school days for grades 1-2. Finance said the timing was intended to reduce over-identification and align with evidence from preliminary data; the LAO recommended rejecting the funding and redirecting it to a discretionary block grant. CDE supported the funding and the general approach but acknowledged the need for local support and training. Several committee members and public witnesses raised concerns that the proposed timing restrictions were too rigid and could delay early intervention, while others supported the delay as a way to improve accuracy and avoid misidentification. For special education, Finance proposed ongoing Proposition 98 increases to adjust for COLA and enrollment changes and to raise the statewide special education base rate to $99 per ADA, equalizing rates across SELPAs. The LAO said the proposal should be adopted but estimated it could be funded for less than the Governor’s figure. CDE and multiple local education representatives strongly supported the increase, citing rising special education enrollment, cost pressures, and large local funding gaps. The committee also heard a brief overview of the school facilities proposal, which continues $1.5 billion in Proposition 2 bond funding for the School Facility Program; OPSC reported significant remaining bond authority but also substantial pending demand, and explained that natural disaster school rebuilding draws from the broader new construction and modernization pools. Finally, the committee reviewed Commission on Teacher Credentialing proposals, including the already-funded $300 million Student Teacher Stipend Program, new state operations resources for misconduct investigations and grant administration, and a $250 million one-time continuation of the Teacher Residency Grant Program. CTC said its grants management system is ready and that it expects better data tracking; public testimony broadly supported the educator workforce investments and urged continued funding for the Golden State Teacher Grant Program and additional support for rural and leadership pipeline programs. No votes were taken, and the hearing adjourned after public testimony.

Transcript Highlights:

• distribution, Gratuity or reward in connection with a grant distribution under the Community Reinvestment
• Second, it updates the Community Reinvestment Account.
• Commerce is required to distribute grants in collaboration with BIPOC community organizations, which
• Under this bill, Commerce must distribute grants in collaboration with BIPOC community organizations
• to homeownership through the community reinvestment program.

Summary: The Senate Housing Committee heard several housing-related bills and gubernatorial appointments. SB 6201 would create property tax and REET exemptions for property used as affordable housing by social housing agencies, with testimony from the sponsor and supporters from Seattle Social Housing and House Our Neighbors emphasizing lower development costs and deeper affordability. Senator Gildon questioned how the 50% occupancy requirement would work at purchase, and staff explained the covenant and compliance requirements. The committee also heard SB 6205, which would add conflict-of-interest restrictions and reporting requirements for the Community Reinvestment Account, Affordable Housing Program, and Covenant Homeownership Program; Senator Braun said the bill responds to reports of misuse and is intended to improve transparency and trust. The committee heard gubernatorial appointments Pedro Espinoza and Diana H. Perez to the Housing Finance Commission, both of whom described their construction, local government, and housing experience and were supported by committee members. In executive session, the committee adopted a substitute and passed SB 6001 on scissors stairs, SB 6026 on allowing residential uses in commercial and mixed-use zones, and SB 6054 on fire-hardened building materials. SB 6026 drew the most debate, with amendments added and others rejected; supporters said it would expand housing supply, while opponents and local governments raised concerns about historic districts, main street areas, and limits on local planning authority. SB 6054 was amended to remove the 10% cap on fire-hardened materials, with members saying it would help homeowners protect against wildfire risk. The committee then moved to public hearings on SB 6069, which would require cities and counties to allow emergency shelters, transitional housing, indoor emergency housing, and permanent supportive housing in more zones and limit local restrictions to objective standards and administrative review. Supporters, including housing providers, the Attorney General’s Office, King County, and Disability Rights Washington, said local barriers are delaying needed housing, while cities and the Association of Washington Cities argued the bill is too broad and would limit operational agreements and local flexibility. The committee also heard SB 6167, which would bar homebuyers from receiving multiple state-funded down payment assistance loans or grants. The sponsor said the bill is meant to maximize limited assistance dollars for more households, but opponents from housing nonprofits, advocates, and a homeless veteran said it would reduce access to homeownership, especially for Black households and families needing layered assistance in high-cost markets. Finally, the committee returned to SB 6205 testimony, where supporters said the bill would prevent self-dealing and misuse of grant funds, while one testifier urged more investigation and oversight resources. No final action was taken on the public hearing bills during the transcript.

Transcript Highlights:

• CSBG is a formula-based block grant program that supports Hawaii's four community action agencies, or
• they get, the community services block grant<00:19:20.720><c> is</c><00:19:21.039><c> somewhat</c><00
• The Community Services Block Grant provides the foundation seed funding designed to attract additional
• Community Services Block Grant.
• </c> of community service and the community of community service and the community services<00:38:13.359

Summary: A joint informational briefing of the House Committee on Labor and the Senate Committee on Labor and Technology was held on August 19, 2025, to hear testimony on the Office of Community Services’ proposed Community Services Block Grant state plan for federal fiscal years 2026 and 2027. Ray Domingo of OCS explained that the plan is intended to maintain federal CSBG funding and focuses on compliance monitoring, coordination among community action agencies and state agencies, and strengthening partnerships. He also reviewed the program structure, noting that Hawaii’s four CAAs serve low-income residents, that the state must pass through at least 90% of the grant to CAAs, and that Hawaii received about $3.8 million in FFY 2025, with allocations to HCAP, Hawaii County Economic Opportunity Council, Kauai Economic Opportunity, and Maui Economic Opportunity. He said statewide CAAs reported serving 40,980 individuals in FFY 2024. Representatives from each CAA testified in support of the plan and described how CSBG functions as flexible “glue” funding that supports overhead, fills gaps, and helps leverage other public and private resources. HCAP’s Robert Piper said the grant helps sustain its broad service network, including Head Start, job training, weatherization, shelter, food assistance, and energy programs, and emphasized its tripartite board structure and annual service to about 20,000 people. Hawaii County’s Chad Hosigal highlighted support for senior farmers market coupons, Meals on Wheels, and transportation services. Kauai Economic Opportunity’s Mabel Fujiuchi said the agency fully supports the plan and described CSBG as nucleus funding that helps support shelter, Meals on Wheels, weatherization, mediation, and other services, including assistance for homeless families and special needs items such as dentures and hearing aids. Maui Economic Opportunity’s Gay Sabonga described CSBG’s role in disaster response after the 2023 wildfires, including shelter transitions, document recovery, housing and utility assistance, bridge grants for small businesses, youth prevention programs, and employment services. Committee members asked about the stability of future federal funding, the frequency of federal assessments, and how satisfaction scores in the state plan were measured. OCS said federal funding information has been mixed and uncertain, that communication with federal partners has been limited and informal, and that the federal assessment website appears outdated; staff said assessments are done every two years. On the satisfaction metric, OCS said the score was 92 out of 100 and believed it reflected participant responses, though they offered to follow up with more detail. No votes or formal actions were taken at the informational briefing.

Transcript Highlights:

• Justice assistant grants in 2010 the Justice assistant grants in 2010 the Minnesota<00:14:49.199><c>
• <c> Community</c><00:46:56.400><c> security</c> supports Community security supports Community security
• the grant.
• a second grant.
• a second grant.

Committee: House Public Safety Finance and Policy

Transcript Highlights:

• So the communication gap was quite large in terms of acknowledging and communicating this issue.
• There was an investment of $291.7 million to the grants, which increased SSP grant levels by 23.95%.
• SSI grants.
• than the entire grant in 28 counties.
• An automatic COLA will ensure that SSI/SSP grants can keep up when costs rise and prevent the grants

Summary: The joint Assembly Budget Subcommittee hearing focused first on long-term services and supports for older adults, especially the “forgotten/overlooked middle” who earn too much for Medi-Cal but cannot afford private long-term care. Administration witnesses from DHCS, the Department of Aging, and Social Services described Medicare’s limited long-term care coverage, Medi-Cal’s role, the elimination of the Medi-Cal asset test, and ongoing state studies and listening sessions on financing options. Testimony from advocates and researchers emphasized rising homelessness among older adults, the need for better navigation and coordination across health, aging, housing, and social service systems, and short-term policy steps such as share-of-cost reform, housing stability supports, and protecting home- and community-based services. Members highlighted the need for a coordinated, no-wrong-door approach and asked for the most impactful budget investments to address affordability and homelessness risk. The second major topic was the Community-Based Adult Services (CBAS) program. CDA reported that CBAS helps participants remain in the community, that 304 centers operate statewide serving about 42,000 people, and that demand is stable but access gaps remain in some regions. DHCS explained that a 2024 rate increase authorized by SB 159 became inoperative after Proposition 35, and that a separate 10% rate change on the fee schedule was the result of a DHCS system error; the department said it would not require recoupment, though managed care plans may act under their contracts. CBAS providers and advocates warned that reimbursement rates have not kept pace with costs, that several centers have closed, and that clawbacks could trigger more closures. They requested $74.8 million ongoing General Fund to close part of the rate gap and preserve the program, while members expressed concern about closures and the cost savings of keeping people out of more expensive institutional care. The hearing then moved to In-Home Supportive Services (IHSS) and statewide collective bargaining. CDSS reviewed provider recruitment and retention efforts, including electronic timesheets, direct deposit, and the now-completed IHSS Career Pathways program, which trained more than 59,000 providers. CDSS also summarized its AB 102 workgroup report on statewide versus regional bargaining, saying the final report would be sent to the Legislature soon and that statewide bargaining appeared more viable than regional bargaining, though it would require clear statutory scope and major fiscal changes. The department estimated that each $1 per hour statewide wage increase would cost at least $1.3 billion to $1.5 billion annually. Labor advocates argued that IHSS wages, benefits, and training are too inconsistent across counties and called for statewide bargaining, consumer participation, and ongoing state funding. County representatives supported stronger wages but cautioned that counties need protection from new costs and administrative burdens, and consumer advocates warned that moving bargaining to the state could weaken local consumer control and the program’s consumer-driven structure.