Transcript Highlights:

• So therefore if an program.
• to attribute to the SNAP program.
• <00:14:47.640><c> uh</c> program uh program uh well<00:14:49.959><c> so</c><00:14:50.240><c> that</c>
• </c> to be able to run the program to be able to run the program efficiently.<00:15:37.120><c> So,</c
• </c><00:16:12.400><c> and</c> of recipients on the SNAP program and of recipients on the SNAP program

Keywords: 1191, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Our lab works across the country to find promising programs.
• Sometimes our research shows that a program is not effective, and that can lead to program improvement
• Our study looked at the impact of the program.
• Our study looked at the impact of the program on students who completed the program, so they graduated
• So how does this compare to other workforce programs?

Summary: The House and Senate Education Committee first approved minutes from February 2 and 3, then took up an interim study proposal on adult education and the Excel Center model. Representatives from Goodwill Industries of Arkansas, the Excel Center network, and the University of Notre Dame’s Lab for Economic Opportunities testified that roughly 300,000 Arkansans over age 19 lack a high school diploma or GED, and argued that the Excel Center provides a supported diploma pathway for adults who struggle with GED testing. Witnesses highlighted wraparound services such as free child care, transportation assistance, tutoring, life coaching, and career services, and cited outcomes including high retention, growing enrollment, and research showing higher employment and earnings and lower criminal justice involvement for graduates. Committee members raised questions about the state’s role, existing adult education programs, and how the study would be structured; the motion to adopt the ISP passed, though there was some procedural disagreement about when questions should have been taken. The committee then heard a detailed adequacy funding overview from BLR staff Katie Walden and Adrian Beck on Arkansas K-12 education finance. They reviewed national funding principles and explained Arkansas’s system, including state and local revenue sources, the Public School Fund, the Educational Excellence Trust Fund, the Educational Adequacy Fund, and the Facilities Partnership Program. Staff said K-12 state and local revenues totaled $6.6 billion in 2025, with foundation funding making up the largest share of district and charter funding, followed by additional, categorical, and supplemental funds. They also explained the matrix-based foundation formula, the role of the uniform rate of tax, and how categorical and supplemental funds support areas such as alternative learning, English learners, special education high-cost cases, teacher salary equalization, declining enrollment, and student growth. Members asked several follow-up questions about how specific funding categories are defined and used, including student support staff, instructional aides, special education high-cost occurrences, ALE funding, teacher salary equalization, and the inclusion of Excel Center amounts in state-local funding totals. Staff said some of those details would be addressed in a later presentation and offered to provide additional records, including district lists and historical information. The meeting ended after the funding overview, with no additional votes or actions beyond the ISP adoption and adjournment.

Transcript Highlights:

• Our lab works across the country to find promising programs.
• Sometimes our research shows that a program is not effective, and that can lead to program improvement
• Our study looked at the impact of the program on students who completed the program, so they graduated
• So how does this compare to other workforce programs?
• For the Public... ...and the Facilities Partnership Program.

Summary: The House and Senate Education Committee first approved minutes from February 2 and 3, then heard an interim study proposal on Arkansas adult education and the Excel Center model, presented by Goodwill Industries of Arkansas and the University of Notre Dame’s Lab for Economic Opportunities. Witnesses argued that about 300,000 Arkansas adults lack a high school diploma or GED and described the Excel Center as a diploma-granting public charter option for adults 19 and older, with wraparound supports such as child care, transportation, tutoring, life coaching, and career services. They said the Arkansas campuses are not state-funded, highlighted growth in enrollment and graduation outcomes, and cited research showing improved employment, earnings, and reduced criminal justice involvement for graduates. Committee members discussed the role of Goodwill’s nonprofit mission, the need for multiple adult education pathways, and the relationship between adult education challenges and broader state efforts such as LEARNS and ACCESS. The committee then debated the interim study proposal procedure, including whether questions should have been taken before the vote. The motion to adopt the ISP passed, and members noted that the study would broadly examine adult education, GED testing, high school diplomas, charter schools, in-person adult education, and funding allocation. Several members asked for follow-up information on current adult education funding, the availability of Excel Centers, and the criminal justice study results. After that, staff from the Bureau of Legislative Research gave a detailed adequacy funding overview for Arkansas K-12 education. They reviewed national funding principles and then explained Arkansas’s revenue streams and distribution system, including general revenue, the Educational Excellence Trust Fund, the Educational Adequacy Fund, local property-tax revenues, and facilities partnership funding. They also walked through the state’s foundation formula, categorical aid, supplemental aid, and additional funding, including the per-student matrix amount of $7,771 for 2025 and how funds are allocated to districts and charters. Members asked about student support staff, special education high-cost occurrences, ALE funding, teacher salary equalization, and the Excel Center’s treatment in funding totals; staff said some of those questions would be addressed in a later spending presentation. The meeting ended after the committee was told the department was present mainly to answer questions and no further business remained.

Transcript Highlights:

• And I asked that question because um this program is one of the last remaining programs we have to try
• And I asked that question because um this program is one of the last remaining programs we have to try
• NRCS's programs, for example.
• </c><01:04:36.720><c> They're</c> program? So they're independent. They're program?
• </c> asking about the budget for the program? asking about the budget for the program?

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The committee first took up House Bill 219, which would revise the renewable portfolio standard. Representative Bose explained that the bill would modify class one definitions, eliminate class two, reduce the utility obligation for class one thermal renewable energy certificates from 2.2% to 1.7%, and adjust alternative compliance payments for classes one, three, and four. He said the changes were intended to save ratepayers an estimated $5.7 million annually, would not materially harm the renewable portfolio standard, and would have little effect on class two because that market is already saturated. Members questioned the impact on consumers, the state budget, and the renewable energy fund; Bose said the fund had already been redirected in the state budget, and another member noted an amended fiscal note showing a $1.2 million reduction in general fund revenue. The committee also discussed the bill’s history, including that it had been added to HB 2 and later removed by the Senate, and Bose said the Senate’s eventual action was hard to predict. The committee then heard House Bill 164 on local records retention from Secretary of State David Scanlan. He said the long-standing local records manager position had never been funded, but that the need for it had grown as towns increasingly digitize records and must ensure accessibility, including ADA compliance. He described the bill as a way to provide state support and expertise to municipalities, especially smaller towns with limited resources, and said the fiscal note for hiring the position remained accurate, though broader website and storage costs could rise over time. Members asked about retrieving lost records, the cost of a public website, and whether records should remain local or be stored at the state level; Scanlan said the state would serve as a resource rather than take control of local records. Finally, the committee began work on House Bill 365, also with Secretary Scanlan, concerning proof of U.S. citizenship for indigent voters. He said the bill would help voters who may lack required documents under the new voter registration law by allowing the state to verify qualifications through federal, private, or other state databases and by providing vouchers to cover the cost of obtaining documents such as birth certificates. He compared the proposal to earlier voter ID accommodations and said the goal was to help qualified voters meet the new requirements without weakening them. Members raised questions about defining “indigent,” how out-of-state birth records would be handled, and the practicality of the verification process; Scanlan said the term would likely need further discussion and that the state would try to assist voters before election day whenever possible.

Transcript Highlights:

• </c> this month is talking about that program this month is talking about that program Integrity<00:03
• </c> well um so this just has that program well um so this just has that program level<00:34:46.359><
• </c><00:46:07.960><c> and</c> administering the waiver programs and administering the waiver programs
• integrity for those programs?
• DCF—we moved several programs over there, such as the Child Care Program.

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• My child care program is more than a business.
• faster, and also, of course, continue the program.
• First thing we found is it's a very popular program.
• program, and the kinship guardianship assistance payment (Kin-GAP) program by allowing adopted youth
• , the adoption assistance program, and the kinship guardianship assistance payment (Kin-GAP) program

Keywords: 987, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• But you acknowledge you do have an 1890 Extension Program.
• , basketball, and all of our programs.
• The first program you mentioned, the residential services program. What is that?
• The programming aspect, we have a director of programming now that kind of oversees the programming for
• So that would include any sort of programming.

Keywords: 1204, all

Transcript Highlights:

• MASA, the Make America Skilled Again program, and the Violence Against Women program.
• program, Vera Lynn Mendez.
• The collateral assistance program.
• The SSBCI program I mentioned, that one is a federal program.
• Programs like the native language programs and so forth.

Transcript Highlights:

• </c><00:04:09.519><c> programs</c><00:04:10.439><c> um</c> State entitlement programs programs um State
• , MinnesotaCare, which is a health care program, child care, public health, housing, and other programs
• </c> children's health insurance program children's health insurance program otherwise<00:07:05.000><
• </c> otherwise known as chip this program otherwise known as chip this program covers<00:07:07.400><c
• One program that TANF supports is the Minnesota Family Investment Program, which provides employment

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Applicants in these programs can take the tests on the last day of their training.
• Program managers at DOH provided a few reasons for the worsening delay.
• So we've heard a couple of audits here about the testing program. I'm...
• Is there any indication of how that plays into this program and the shortage of people?
• The training partnership is working to... ...their 119 training programs across the state.

Keywords: 904, all

Summary: The Joint Legislative Audit and Review Committee heard a State Auditor’s Office performance audit on the Restoring Quality Home Care Initiative (I-1163), which created home care aide certification requirements, FBI background checks, and an abuse/neglect registry. Auditors said some requirements likely improve safety, especially background checks and training, but the state lacked pre-2011 data to measure outcomes directly. They also found Washington has a long-term care workforce shortage, though its workforce supply ranks better than many states, and that more stringent entry requirements do not appear to reduce workforce participation compared with other states. The audit’s main concern was that the certification process is slow and burdensome. Auditors reported that most applicants never finish certification, that only about one-third of fiscal year 2025 applicants were certified within the 200-day legal deadline, and that the average time to certification was 463 days. They identified delays between training and testing, limited testing access in some areas, and redundant Department of Health verification of FBI background checks as key causes. The audit recommended streamlining the process by accepting applications later in the process, expanding testing within training programs, and eliminating the redundant background-check verification. Department of Health and Department of Social and Health Services staff largely agreed with the audit’s findings and recommendations. They said they have already made improvements, including moving exams into more than 110 training programs, increasing credentialing staff, and reducing barriers through rule changes. DSHS noted testing is offered in 13 languages. Committee members asked about testing contract incentives, language access, and whether the agencies would seek statutory or budget changes to implement the recommendations. No public testimony was offered, and the meeting adjourned without any vote or formal action by the committee.

Transcript Highlights:

• Department of CDE, any thoughts on those specific programs and ensuring resources support those programs
• I think it really is dependent on programs.
• , career technical education program funding, and the small district, small school district program?
• career technical education program funding and the small district small school district program and
• For the small school district programs, you've alluded to a new program that was established with voter

Summary: The committee heard opening public comment and then took up several K-12 budget items in the Governor’s January proposal. On LCFF and necessary small schools, the Department of Finance described a 2.41% COLA, a roughly $2.2 billion increase for districts and charters, and a $30.7 million ongoing augmentation to raise necessary small schools funding by 20%. The LAO supported funding the COLA and said the small schools proposal had merit, but questioned the 20% figure and warned about a sharp funding cliff around the enrollment thresholds. Members and witnesses repeatedly raised declining enrollment, attendance, and the need to align funding with outcomes and local cost pressures. The chair and several members also asked whether consolidation, shared administration, or alternative formulas could better address small district costs, and the issue was left open for further discussion. The panel then discussed special education equalization. Finance proposed $509 million ongoing Proposition 98 funding to raise the statewide special education base rate to $999 per ADA, which would fully equalize SELPA base rates; the LAO said the same target could likely be reached with less money under current assumptions. CDE strongly supported equalization as an equity issue and said about 15% of students are identified with disabilities, with identification rising by roughly 20,000 to 25,000 students per year. Members raised concerns about staffing shortages, high caseloads, and the need to use any additional funds for inclusive practices, alternative diploma pathways, and the extraordinary cost pool. The committee also discussed whether the budget language should reflect the $509 million amount or the $999 rate, and the item was held open. For the Learning Recovery Emergency Block Grant, Finance proposed restoring $757.3 million one-time to complete the program, while the LAO recommended approval because learning loss remains unresolved and districts have generally used the funds for tutoring, supplemental instruction, and other academic supports. CDE explained that LEAs must revisit their needs assessments and that many districts are using the funds alongside other support systems, but members pressed for clearer accountability and better data on how much money actually goes to tutoring or other direct services. The committee then reviewed the Student Support and Professional Development Discretionary Block Grant, with Finance proposing $2.8 billion one-time and the LAO saying discretionary funding can help districts address local priorities but should be paired with fiscal oversight and possibly more targeted priorities. Members split between supporting flexibility for local needs and worrying that the grant could be used to cover ongoing structural deficits without clear evidence of student-outcome gains; the issue was also held open. Finally, the committee heard a high-level overview of school facilities funding under Proposition 2, with Finance proposing to continue $1.5 billion in bond spending in 2026-27. OPSC said that at the current pace all Prop 2 K-12 funds would likely be exhausted around 2029-30, and that demand is shifting toward modernization as enrollment declines in many areas. Members asked about school closures, reuse of unused sites, and the new small school district facilities program, which OPSC said is moving toward proposed regulations and would begin accepting modernization applications in November 2026 and new construction applications in January 2027. The committee also briefly noted community college facilities funding and asked for more information later in the process.

Transcript Highlights:

• We're trying to be them on programs.
• . programs. programs.
• . program. program.
• Um, when the legislature renewed this program during the 2023 session, um program payment amounts were
• </c> that year are eligible for the program. that year are eligible for the program.

Bills: HF3474, HF3475, HF3508

Keywords: agriculture, funding, research, agricultural institute, state appropriations, education, leadership council, compensation, research institute, dairy assistance, investment, relief initiative, farm support, 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• </c><00:02:47.280><c> for</c> uh this relates to a uh a a program for uh this relates to a uh a a program
• the interest in our highway programs.
• :15:26.560><c> to</c> the authority of the Ralph uh program to the authority of the Ralph uh program
• So those are the three asks for the capital committee. inii program which is the infill inii program
• costs to Metro Transit programs.

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• </c> designed program in our estimation. designed program in our estimation.
• language of this program predated MnDOT's program.
• of this program predated MnDOT's program.
• </c> to our construction program. to our construction program.
• program?

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• programs.
• and the In-Home Supportive Services program, IHSS.
• DOR is additionally closely monitoring the elimination of DEI programs and policies, as these programs
• day program rates are higher.
• , as well as our Unified Champions Program, which is an integrated sports program of students with and

Summary: The Assembly Budget Subcommittee on Human Services held a hearing on developmental services, rehabilitation, and related supports, with no votes taken. The first major topic was the Master Plan for Developmental Services. Administration officials described a year-long, community-driven process that included a steering committee, work groups, and statewide engagement sessions, and said the final draft would be released that Friday with about 170 recommendations. The Department of Developmental Services said the plan would inform future work, but did not offer a detailed implementation roadmap. The LAO said the plan contains significant policy and budget implications, may require statutory changes, and needs further analysis to turn recommendations into actionable proposals. Advocates and regional center representatives urged the Legislature and administration to avoid letting the plan sit on a shelf, called for prioritization and ongoing stakeholder oversight, and emphasized the need to address equity, workforce, service coordination, and cross-system collaboration. The chair said he wanted to work with the LAO on trailer bill language and future reporting to create a clearer path forward. The second topic was the Office of Employment First and competitive integrated employment. Administration witnesses said California has ended subminimum wage under SB 639, but that moving people into competitive integrated employment remains a major priority. They described existing efforts such as DDS’s coordinated career pathways pilot, paid internships, job development services, benefits counseling, and DOR’s career counseling and referral services, along with pilot projects in San Diego and Orange County. The State Council on Developmental Disabilities and advocates argued that employment outcomes have remained stuck at roughly 15% and that a dedicated Employment First Office is needed to coordinate across agencies, align goals, and improve outcomes. The LAO recommended regular legislative oversight on people transitioning out of subminimum wage and asked for technical assistance on coordinated career pathways. The chair criticized the administration’s decision to effectively eliminate funding for the office, requested a detailed implementation timeline and quarterly transition reports, and said the committee would continue pressing for the office to be implemented. The final issue was respite services, utilization trends, and access. DDS reported that in-home respite use and spending have risen sharply over several years, with about 150,000 people using respite in 2023-24 and expenditures reaching about $1 billion. Officials said access depends on families knowing the service exists, service coordinators identifying need, and having enough providers, especially in rural and linguistically diverse communities. The San Diego Regional Center said utilization generally mirrors statewide trends, but access is stronger in some areas, such as Imperial County, where families often prefer family-directed or agency-supported models that allow them to hire trusted workers. Committee members emphasized the importance of respite for family health and caregiver well-being, asked whether service coordinators are asking practical questions about sleep and stress, and discussed the need for better identification of complex behavioral and medical needs. DDS said a standardized family support tool and updated IPP process are intended to improve consistency, transparency, and person-centered assessment for respite and related services.

Transcript Highlights:

• So we stood up this program.
• Uh I have a little bit more program.
• this this program, we actually shut this program<00:10:24.160><c> off</c><00:10:24.399><c> the</c><00
• . program. program.
• In order to programs and services.

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• We are now going to turn to the meat of our program.
• When we look at cuts to the residual program, essentially eliminating that program, that can directly
• The second item is the Cal Competes Program. We strongly support that program.
• The second item is the Cal Compete's program. We strongly support that program.
• and the multifamily housing program.

Summary: The Assembly Budget Committee opened its hearing on the Governor’s 2026-27 budget with remarks emphasizing the start of a months-long process, the need for fiscal responsibility, and concerns about structural deficits, federal funding losses, housing and homelessness, and oversight. The vice chair echoed those concerns, warning against budgets built on short-term fixes and urging accountability. The Department of Finance presented a balanced budget year proposal of about $349 billion in total expenditures, including $248 billion General Fund, while acknowledging a structural imbalance in the out years and proposing a workload budget with limited new spending or cuts. Finance said the budget relies on stronger-than-expected revenues, but also on constitutional obligations such as Proposition 98 and Proposition 2, and on suspending a rainy-day fund true-up deposit to cover a projected $2.9 billion budget-year deficit. The administration highlighted higher education funding, climate and wildfire resilience investments, a new ZEV incentive, added Health and Human Services costs tied to H.R. 1, child care funding, and three tax proposals: third-party delivery tax compliance, a sustainable aviation fuel tax credit, and an extension of the California Competes tax credit. The LAO, by contrast, warned that the budget is “precariously balanced,” cited downside risk from stock market-driven revenues, and urged the Legislature to use reserves, avoid suspending rainy-day deposits, and begin shrinking multi-year deficits sooner rather than later. Member questions focused on wildfire mitigation and insurance, transit and GGRF funding, federal cuts affecting CalFresh and Medi-Cal, the proposed tax credits, homelessness accountability language, and education funding. Several members pressed for earlier partnership on deficit solutions and for more scrutiny of budget choices. The committee also discussed declining enrollment in K-12, community colleges, and CSU, with concerns about whether funding formulas are aligned with actual student demand. No formal votes or final actions were taken in the hearing.

Transcript Highlights:

• They're relatively new programs.
• However, we have hit significant milestones for both our CCFPL program and our debt collector program
• we view as still in pretty early stage as programs.
• There are significant challenges that this program has experienced.
• We want to get them into our intervention program.

Summary: The subcommittee heard budget proposals for Exposition Park, the California Science Center, the Department of Financial Protection and Innovation (DFPI), the Debt Collection Licensing Act program, and the Board of Registered Nursing. For Exposition Park, the administration requested $96.5 million for utility replacement, site improvements, code compliance, accessibility, and safety upgrades, plus $1.698 million for operational sustainability funded from the park’s improvement fund. The LAO said the proposals had merit but noted the first item could be downscaled if needed because of the state’s budget condition. Members emphasized the park’s deferred maintenance, major upcoming events, and the need to protect a statewide asset; both Exposition Park items were held open. The Science Center requested funding to open and operate the new Air and Space Center, including staffing for the facility that will display the Space Shuttle Endeavour and expand exhibit space. The LAO supported the proposal but suggested the Legislature consider alternative funding sources such as admission fees, parking fees, or private funds. Members discussed the Science Center’s public-private funding model, the importance of keeping access affordable for disadvantaged communities, and the tradeoff between free admission and long-term operating support. The item was also held open. DFPI sought continuation of expenditure authority for the California Consumer Financial Protection Law, debt collection licensing, and broker-dealer/investment adviser workloads, and the LAO recommended limited-term funding with more cumulative reporting before permanent funding is considered. Members pressed the department on whether its workload and spending are tied to measurable outcomes rather than just activity counts, and DFPI cited complaint resolution, enforcement actions, and restitution recovered as examples of impact. The Debt Collection Licensing Act item drew similar LAO comments, but members raised stronger concerns about the financing model, the gap between projected and actual licensee counts, and whether spending levels are justified; that item was held open. The Board of Registered Nursing requested $1.4 million for eight special investigators to address rising complaints, and the board said most complaints are resolved through investigation, referral, probation, or rehabilitation rather than discipline. Members asked about complaint backlogs, viral and potentially automated complaints, bias in care, and the lack of broader inspection authority; the item was also held open.

Transcript Highlights:

• Programs like welding—we currently have a waiting list—and the upcoming electrician program demonstrate
• called the Watercraft and Vessel Engineering Program.
• of the program, and I'm an evangelist for the prepaid college program.
• And I have to say the prepaid program is an amazing program, has put so many kids through school and
• workforce programs aligned with today's labor market.

Keywords: 999, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• , because it is a federal program.
• If they reduce the program in some way, if they increase the provisions of the program, then it will
• </c> decision to reform the this program decision to reform the this program because<00:03:48.439><c>
• It is a federal program.
• How's this program working?

Keywords: 00:25 Call to Order/Roll Call 01:36 Discussion of 25RS SB 153 23:11 Roll Call Vote on 25RS SB 153 30:56 Adjournment, 958, all

Summary: The House Standing Committee on Health Services met on March 14, 2025, and took up a committee substitute for Senate Bill 153. The substitute deleted the original bill language and replaced it with provisions from Senate Bill 14, aimed at prohibiting pharmaceutical manufacturers from discriminating against 340B covered entities and adding reporting requirements for those entities. The sponsor explained that the protections would sunset after one year, allowing lawmakers to review data by July 1, 2026, and that Kentucky would continue to follow any future federal changes to the 340B program. Members asked several questions about the scope of the reporting, including what “total operating cost” means, how duplicate discounts are prevented, whether the reporting applies only to hospitals and not federally qualified health centers, and who would receive the data. The sponsor said the reporting is intended to help the Cabinet for Health and Family Services and the Office of Health Data Analytics at LRC assess how the program is working, including charity care and community benefits, while preserving protections for rural hospitals and allowing them to continue using contract pharmacies. A representative from LRC confirmed the data would come to the General Assembly through the Office of Health Data Analytics. The committee expressed mixed views about the balance between transparency and potential burdens on hospitals, especially rural facilities. Several members said they were supportive but had reservations about the reporting requirements and the sunset structure, while others noted concerns about unintended consequences and the possibility of changes on the House floor. The committee ultimately adopted the committee substitute, approved a title amendment, and reported Senate Bill 153 with House Committee Substitute 2 favorably. The meeting then adjourned.