Transcript Highlights:

• </c><00:50:40.880><c> with</c> medical information can be shared with medical information can be shared
• </c> behalf of our members, I'm glad to share behalf of our members, I'm glad to share our<01:20:04.719
• Um also their their their cost share.
• </c><01:21:54.639><c> our</c> many other things and glad to share our many other things and glad to share
• </c><01:44:29.280><c> Um</c><01:44:30.080><c> and</c> fair share. Um and fair share.

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• But they are not able to process the two medicines and see what my cost sharing is.
• And if all the biosimilars are preferred drugs, it should yield a lower cost sharing.
• We're not saying it shouldn't have a substitution, but it shouldn't yield a higher cost share, and as
• My issue is if the substitution could lead to a higher cost share for the patient.
• However, market share remains too low.

Keywords: 904, all

Transcript Highlights:

• reminds that true strength is found in our differences of faith, language, and culture, be a source of shared
• therefore, be it resolved that the Senate honor the 26th Republic Day of India as a symbol of the shared
• It thrives when we defend dignity and uphold our shared principles, and when we speak up for our neighbors
• President, to join me in supporting this resolution and upholding our shared principles of humanity,
• differences of opinion and how we move forward with things, and that as much as we support what we share

Keywords: 904, all

Transcript Highlights:

• They will share their perspectives and their findings as part of the creative economy work group that
• I wanted to share that I do represent Ontario and Montclair.
• You know, I wanted to share with you that I represent Doherty, City of Doherty.
• And anyway we can, so just thank you for sharing. Senator, thank you so much.
• I'm here to share that behind that number, as you know, are organizations like mine.

Summary: The Joint Committee on the Arts held an informational hearing on California’s first sector-specific creative economy strategic plan, “California’s Future Is Creative,” developed under AB 127 and related legislation. Chair Allen framed the plan as a response to California’s large but vulnerable creative economy, citing workforce losses, federal funding headwinds, and the need to support artists, cultural organizations, public media, museums, cultural districts, and film/TV production. He also highlighted budget asks including support for California Humanities, museums, public media, cultural districts, a post-production incentive proposal (AB 2319), and funding to implement the strategic plan. California Arts Council Director Danielle Brazel, Institute for the Future’s Rachel Hatch, CDE’s Allison Frenzel, and CWDB’s Michael Weoff described the planning process, which included a 30-plus-member work group, interagency coordination, and a phased approach from framework development to implementation and evaluation. They identified major forces shaping the sector over the next decade, including AI, climate disruption, affordability, access to capital, and social cohesion, and outlined six action areas: workforce preparation, business stabilization, cultural identity/tourism, cross-sector incentives, ROI/data tracking, and state capacity/infrastructure. Members and panelists repeatedly emphasized that the plan must be resourced and integrated across agencies rather than left siloed. A second panel of practitioners and advocates focused on workforce pathways and local implementation. Ricarlo Handy described the Handy Foundation’s registered apprenticeship pipeline into film and TV jobs and argued that current data systems undercount gig, 1099, and LLC-based creative work. Joanna Reynolds discussed Arts for LA’s Creative Jobs Collective, which aims to create 10,000 living-wage creative jobs in Los Angeles County by 2030, while Alejandro Gutierrez Chavez urged embedding artists in health, aging, and behavioral health systems as community problem-solvers. Roxanne Messina Kaptur spoke about the need to normalize arts careers and expand residency and school-based models. Senator Rubio, who joined later, shared her own arts and teaching background, supported arts access in schools and small theaters, and raised concerns about AI, asking how schools and educators can adapt. In the final panel, Rebecca Ratzkin reported on 26 statewide town halls with more than 1,100 attendees, which confirmed support for the plan but also highlighted needs for better information access, new financial models, stronger definitions and data, and more partnerships. Julie Baker of California for the Arts and California Arts Advocates urged sustained public funding, saying the plan is actionable only if the Legislature and administration provide resources, including increased California Arts Council funding and support for implementation. No formal votes were taken; the hearing was informational and concluded with calls for continued legislative and cross-agency collaboration.

Transcript Highlights:

• So I'll reiterate a little bit of what I shared. So actually transitioning to the alternative.
• We are happy to share more and respond to questions at the appropriate time.
• We are happy to share more, respond to questions at the appropriate time.
• We are aligned with Every Child California's positions that were shared here today.
• We also share your frustration, Mr.

Summary: The Assembly Budget Subcommittees on early childhood education heard a broad review of the Governor’s child care and preschool budget proposals, with testimony from the Department of Finance, the Department of Social Services (CDSS), the California Department of Education (CDE), and the Legislative Analyst’s Office (LAO). The main topics were cost-of-care-plus and COLA adjustments, the California State Preschool Program, child care slot reductions tied to federal and Proposition 64 funding changes, disaster recovery grants for child care facilities, trailer bill proposals on family fees and absences, prospective pay, and several budget change proposals for departmental staffing and licensing. Officials also discussed the state’s transition toward an alternative methodology for setting rates based on the true cost of care. On rate reform, CDSS and CDE said the current reimbursement system remains below the alternative methodology in many counties and that providers continue to struggle with recruitment and retention. The LAO recommended aligning cost-of-care-plus increases across provider types, while CDE urged that any COLA be added to base rates rather than cost-of-care-plus payments because providers view the latter as less ongoing. CDSS said the next alternative methodology update will be developed with a contractor during fiscal year 2026-27, with public engagement and legislative input, and estimated that fully transitioning to rates informed by the methodology would take about 24 months once policy and funding are in place. CDSS also said the direct-service cost of care under the methodology was estimated at about $18.7 billion in a July 2025 report. A major point of contention was the proposed reduction of 4,167 child care slots due to lower federal CCDF funding and reduced Proposition 64 revenue. CDSS said it expects to absorb the reduction through unspent funds and relinquishments so currently enrolled children are not disrupted, while the LAO supported the reduction as a way to avoid worsening the structural deficit. Members strongly objected to the slot cuts, arguing the administration has repeatedly proposed reductions after prior budget agreements and emphasizing the economic and family benefits of child care. The committee also discussed preschool enrollment trends, including growth in three-year-old enrollment and a sharp increase in two-year-olds served under a temporary provision, with CDE warning that the temporary two-year-old authority expires in 2027. The committee also reviewed an $11.5 million Proposition 64 proposal for child care infrastructure grants for facilities impacted by 2025 state disasters, especially the Los Angeles fires, and members asked for trailer bill language to make the funds flexible for repairs, equipment, insurance, and permitting. On trailer bill items, the panel discussed codifying family fee reimbursement rules, defining excessive unexplained absences to allow disenrollment after prolonged nonuse, and expanding temporary provider absences; CDSS said the absence policy is meant to mirror federal CCDF rules, while CDE said it is already pursuing its own rulemaking. The hearing also covered prospective pay, with CDSS and CDE saying they are waiting for final federal guidance before moving ahead; LAO said the state could save ongoing costs if the federal requirement is rescinded. Finally, the committee reviewed staffing and support budget requests for CDSS and other implementation items, and held several items open for further discussion before the May Revision. Public comment overwhelmingly urged full funding for child care slots, true cost-of-care payments, and ongoing support for early education programs and county offices of education.

Transcript Highlights:

• And I'd call attention to what's been shared primarily from the opposition as things that worked well
• Shared use of facilities.
• I would like to share some of those stories now.
• So for those of you that are concerned, I share concerns. I’m not being dismissive.
• Just to add a little bit of clarification, if you, it's a cost-sharing model.

Summary: The committee heard Assembly Bill 664, which would authorize Southwestern College in Chula Vista to develop a limited pilot of faculty-led bachelor’s degree programs tied to regional workforce needs, with collaboration requirements, an independent evaluation, and a sunset in 2035. The author and supporters argued the bill would address local access and affordability problems in South San Diego, where many students are place-bound and the region lacks a nearby public university offering bachelor’s degrees. Opponents from the CSU, UC, and AICCU said the measure would bypass the existing AB 927 consultation process and could set a precedent for duplication and expansion outside the current statewide framework. After debate, the committee passed AB 664 on a due-pass motion to Appropriations, with the roll showing eight ayes and one no, later updated to nine ayes and one no after the roll was held open. The committee then took up Assembly Bill 1241, which directs a study of a “pay-it-forward” higher education financing model in which students would attend without upfront tuition and repay costs later based on income. The author and Superintendent of Public Instruction Tony Thurmond framed the bill as a response to rising college costs and student debt, arguing California should study innovative affordability models used elsewhere. Some members raised concerns about fiscal feasibility and whether the model had worked in other states, while others supported the study as a modest first step. AB 1241 passed to Appropriations on an eight-aye, two-no vote. Assembly Bill 713 would allow undocumented students at UC, CSU, and community colleges to access paid campus jobs, internships, and research positions. Supporters said the bill would improve equity, affordability, and student success, and that campus employment is a critical pathway for undocumented students who already pay tuition and fees. Opponents argued the bill conflicts with federal law and could expose campuses and the state to legal and funding risks; supporters responded that state entities are not bound by the federal prohibition in the way described and emphasized the need to protect students and expand opportunity. The committee also heard concerns about student privacy and data protection. The bill was moved to Appropriations, with the roll initially showing five ayes, three noes, and one not voting, and the roll held open for additional members. Finally, Assembly Bill 1171 was presented as a modernization of the existing part-time faculty health insurance program for community colleges, aimed at making coverage more consistent and predictable across districts. The author said the bill would not create a new entitlement but would strengthen participation in the current program to better reflect the realities of a workforce made up largely of part-time and multi-district faculty. The transcript ends as the presentation begins, before testimony, debate, or a vote on AB 1171.

Transcript Highlights:

• Chairman, speaking of SHARE, when I became secretary, I was convinced that we may need to replace SHARE
• We undertook a comprehensive review of the SHARE system.
• And I do, and I'm happy to share this.
• I don't know if we've shared this with your committee, if I can...
• Leo has some that he can share, and then the rest are coming shortly.

Transcript Highlights:

• I wonder if there's lessons learned that you could share today, too. So, Mr.
• And I'll be sure to share this with my former spouse. I appreciate that.
• And I'll be sure to share this with my former spouse, who was also an Army vet.
• Johnson sharing about...
• Thank you for continuing to share more. And I wanted to, Ms.

Summary: The joint informational hearing focused on the role of County Veterans Service Officers (CVSOs), CalVet’s support for them, and the growing problem of for-profit, unaccredited claims companies. Committee leaders and witnesses emphasized that CVSOs are often the first point of contact for veterans and their families, helping with disability claims, education benefits, survivor benefits, housing, health care, and other wraparound services. Testimony highlighted the return on investment from CVSO work, with witnesses citing hundreds of millions in new federal benefits secured for California veterans and arguing that current state funding is too low relative to the workload and need. County representatives from Nevada, Los Angeles, and San Luis Obispo described local models of service. Los Angeles County highlighted a “no wrong door” approach, peer navigators, suicide review work, justice-involved veteran services, and homelessness coordination, while San Luis Obispo described rural outreach, mental health partnerships, and high suicide rates in its county. Nevada County stressed that smaller counties can be disadvantaged by workload-based formulas and that additional funding would expand access, especially in rural areas. Several witnesses said veterans often need more than claims help and should be connected to mental health, employment, food, and family supports. Much of the discussion centered on predatory claims consultants, which witnesses said charge veterans for services that accredited CVSOs provide free. Members and witnesses described cases involving requests for VA and banking logins, misleading advertising, and contracts that can take a percentage of veterans’ benefits. Committee members expressed support for legislation to curb these practices and for increased funding for CVSOs, including the Legislature’s intent to fund 50% of county veterans’ services operations. A CalVet deputy secretary also testified that California’s accreditation and training system improves claim quality and appeal outcomes, and that CalVet works with CVSOs through training, district offices, and appeals representation.

Transcript Highlights:

• Thank you for sharing. Thank you, Squid. I think that's helpful.
• We will take it with us and share it. So, thank you for that.
• We will take it with us and share it. So, thank you for that.
• We will take it with us and share<00:21:32.720><c> it.
• </c><00:21:34.400><c> I</c> share it. So, thank you for that. I share it. So, thank you for that.

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• As you know cost sharing component.
• </c> major share of their payments. major share of their payments.
• So,<02:57:28.560><c> cost</c><02:57:29.080><c> sharing</c> So, cost sharing So, cost sharing for<02:57
• do have that recording of that hearing. cost share is not a deferral cost share is not a deferral um
• </c> no cost share. no cost share.

Keywords: 916, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Our members have shared concrete examples of what this would mean.
• But I know she's sharing health, so thank you, Mr. Lowenthal. Yes, thank you. When you're ready.
• Because I actually think that data sharing is really valuable.
• We've shared amendments with the author's office.
• So I think I had shared with you my concern. So, you know, I can't support that today.

Summary: The committee heard several bills focused on privacy, accessibility, labor, and public safety. AB 1798 by Assemblymember Wilson would bar life and disability insurers from using non-diagnostic genetic information, including direct-to-consumer test results, in underwriting. Supporters argued the bill would protect privacy and encourage genetic testing, while insurers opposed it as unnecessary and said genetic data should be treated like other predictive health information. The bill passed the committee on a 7-0 vote and was held open for absent members. AB 2190 by Assemblymember Wallace would create website accessibility standards based on WCAG guidelines and add affirmative defenses intended to reduce serial litigation while improving access for people with disabilities. Disability advocates supported the measure as a needed civil-rights update, while business groups warned it could increase liability and create unclear compliance obligations. The bill passed 9-0 and was sent to Appropriations. AB 2721 by Assemblymember Carrillo would require hotels to post notice when they know or should know that U.S. Customs and Border Protection or ICE are using the premises, with supporters saying workers and guests deserve transparency and safety. Hotel and business groups opposed it, citing privacy, liability, and concerns about interfering with federal operations. The committee voted 6-2 to pass the bill to Appropriations, with the roll left open. AB 2027 by Assemblymember Ward would restrict employers from using worker data to train AI systems that replace workers and limit sharing of worker data for automation; labor groups supported it and business and public-sector groups opposed it as too broad. The bill passed 7-2 to Appropriations, with the roll left open. The committee also heard AB 1837 by Assemblymember Mark Gonzalez, which would extend and tighten privacy rules for transit agencies’ use of forward-facing cameras to enforce bus-lane violations; supporters said the cameras improve transit flow and safety, and the bill was presented with amendments, though no final vote is reflected in the transcript excerpt.

Transcript Highlights:

• We have our differences, but our shared faith, our shared values, and our shared love of the people of
• We have our differences, but our shared faith, our shared values, and our shared love of the people of
• Moments I share with my kids often remind me of what's really important and just how blessed I am.
• Hundreds of times over many years, but I've never publicly shared the next part.
• He shared how he and his wife had settled in Virginia and that he was now raising two young kids.

Keywords: 1204, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Chair: Thank you for being here and sharing your story. I will give this another shot.
• Chair: Thank you for sharing your story and being here today.
• Harris: To the young ladies who did speak, thank you so much for sharing your story.
• I'm curious about the removal and its impact based on what the Association just shared. Rep.
• How do you require agencies to share communications and share responsibilities when you don't even know

Transcript Highlights:

• OK, next we have um Committee Substitute for Senate Bill 120 as amended, no behavioral health cost sharing
• Eliminating behavioral health cost sharing ensures that individuals have access to medically necessary
• Because less than 30% of the total share of members goes to Molina and United, it's already included
• Substitute for SB 443, no cholesterol lowering drug cost sharing, right, Senator Hickey?
• They would create a shared experience and design this together.

Transcript Highlights:

• Providers share that these individuals have more complex needs, putting a strain on our providers during
• I have a long career working with and in other states, and I really want to just highlight and share
• </c><00:09:31.959><c> it</c> state-to-state comparison and share it state-to-state comparison and share
• So again, as I shared earlier, those reports are being distributed to leadership.
• And as you noted, we will be back here to share more information on that. Great, thank you.

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• Thank you for sharing that. Would anyone else from the public like to testify on this bill?
• Thank you for sharing that. I know that was difficult. Next on deck is Janice Deona.
• Thank you for sharing that. Would anyone else from the public like to testify?
• </c> dedicated team of young adults who share dedicated team of young adults who share the<01:19:40.400
• I could relate to it so..." that students have shared in our surveys that students have shared in our

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• </c><00:03:09.640><c> uh</c> way the one thing that I have shared uh way the one thing that I have shared
• <00:20:16.039><c> we</c><00:20:16.320><c> could</c><00:20:16.559><c> do</c> share we could do share we
• share I was sharing us and and she was share I was sharing some<00:32:00.480><c> things</c><00:32:00.720
• </c> leave uh she just lit up and she shared leave uh she just lit up and she shared with<00:32:13.360
• </c> those experiences that people shared those experiences that people shared with<01:10:18.040><c>

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• Our Strategic Shared Initiatives Program is now, like the Fiscal Health Monitoring Program, an ongoing
• Our Strategic Shared Initiatives Program is now to address our cost structures.
• Operating from a shared regional framework.
• So I invite you to share with my office and I can put that together.
• We continue to see a decline in the share of our students graduating with debt.

Keywords: 987, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• child We know you share our commitment to having our budget reflect our values, a budget that reflects
• So we're working to share additional. general fund savings in 28 to 29.
• So I think there are proposals that those stakeholders have shared with us.
• But I'm asking, can you share the results of those updated results?
• So there's no change in the methodology from what we shared with you before.

Summary: The hearing began with opening remarks on the Governor’s May Revision for child care and human services, with committee members and advocates stressing that the budget should not be balanced on the backs of low-income families, children, and providers. Legislative members and public witnesses strongly opposed the proposed suspension of the child care COLA, reductions to the Emergency Child Care Bridge Program, and the lack of codified rate reform tied to the alternative methodology. Several speakers also urged more support for providers affected by the Eaton fire and other disasters, and called for child care to be funded at the true cost of care and for additional slots to be restored. Administration, LAO, and Department of Education staff described the child care proposal as maintaining existing funding levels while adding administrative resources to prepare for federally required prospective payment changes and single-rate reform. The administration said the May Revision would suspend the 2025–26 COLA and reduce Bridge Program funding to align with utilization, while the LAO raised questions about the size and purpose of the proposed rate-reform and prospective-payment funding and recommended rejecting a Department of Technology exemption. CDE supported continued early education investments but said it would need additional resources if prospective pay were extended to state preschool, and it objected to a proposed reallocation of preschool funds for inclusive education grants. The committee then moved to the IHSS portion of the May Revision. DSS outlined five major proposals: capping provider work hours at 50 per week, eliminating IHSS for undocumented adults age 19 and older, shifting certain Community First Choice reassessment penalties to counties, reinstating the Medi-Cal asset test as a conforming IHSS reduction, and automating the termination of IHSS when Medi-Cal eligibility ends. DSS also discussed funding to implement a federal HCBS access rule and a separate reassessment of IHSS administrative methodology that found counties would need additional administrative funding. Finance said the proposals were intended to slow program growth and improve sustainability, while the LAO said it was still analyzing the package and raised concerns about implementation, county workload, and the potential loss of services. Committee members and public commenters criticized the IHSS cuts, especially the overtime cap and the elimination of services for undocumented adults and people affected by the asset test. Advocates argued that IHSS workers and recipients depend on these services, that county administration is already underfunded, and that the proposals could destabilize vulnerable consumers. The chair closed by saying the committee would continue to fight for child care and would not pause on child care, and the meeting recessed before moving on to the remaining May Revision items.

Transcript Highlights:

• those; it's just how they share them and when they share them.
• </c> based on the fact that they may share based on the fact that they may share things<01:15:33.880>
• </c> important and they should be sharing important and they should be sharing those<01:15:42.600><c>
• it's just how they share them and when<01:15:43.719><c> they</c><01:15:43.800><c> share</c> when they
• share when they share them<01:15:46.639><c> so</c><01:15:46.840><c> in</c><01:15:47.000><c> closing<

Keywords: 1183, house