Transcript Highlights:

• </c><00:23:14.000><c> my</c> they've shown me as I have shared my they've shown me as I have shared my
• Kentucky and Japan also share close cultural ties.
• Seven Kentucky and Japanese cities share sister city relationships.
• Seven Kentucky and Japanese cities share sister city relationships.
• Seven Kentucky and Japanese cities share sister city relationships.

Keywords: Convene 00:00 Senate Message 04:45 Calendar/2nd Readings 05:20 Report of Committees 07:05 Orders of the Day 08:23 HB 214 08:33 HB 416 12:26 HB 281 16:20 HB 134 18:13 Motions, Petitions, and Communications 21:08 Introduction of New Bills and Resolutions 37:01 Recess for ConC/Rules Meeting 39:15 ConC/Rules Report 42:29 Floor Amendments 44:27 Correction to Introduction of New Bills and Resolutions 46:14 Adjournment 46:40, 958, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Charles will share a little bit more.
• In updating the information and providing some of that updated evidence-based research to share.
• But there is a website available; I can share that with you.
• And I will be sure to share that information.
• I'll share my slides in just a moment. There we are. Okay.

Transcript Highlights:

• It’s a way to put apps on their phones to be able to share their text messages.
• Many times it takes years before they ever share it.
• I was sharing with the assemblywoman that I'm working with, like athlete orientation.
• Therapy program, which I'll share a little bit more about.
• I'll share with some of the teens that I work with.

Summary: The committee met to discuss domestic violence with a focus on teen dating violence, healthy relationships, and the impact of technology on abuse. Chair Blanca Rubio opened by describing the urgency of the issue, including a recent teen murder in her district tied to domestic violence, and emphasized that restraining orders alone do not prevent abuse. The first panel featured Janica Morin Pasquale and Taylor Stone Mill, who described warning signs in teens such as constant monitoring through phones and social media, isolation from friends, jealousy normalized by online content, and control through gifts, food delivery, and access to passwords or tracking apps. They stressed that many teens do not tell parents, that parents often miss the signs, and that prevention should begin early and be reinforced in schools, homes, and youth activities. They also cited resources such as Love Is Respect, One Love, and Take It Down, and urged consistent funding and implementation of the California Healthy Youth Act rather than one-time lessons. The second panel shifted to the effects of domestic violence on children and the systems that respond to them. Joyce Blue of the Sacramento Regional Family Justice Center described the center’s wraparound services, including forensic interviews, legal help, housing support, child therapy, and high-risk response, and highlighted the prevalence and danger of strangulation, including cases with no visible injury. She explained that domestic violence is about power and control, that children often normalize abuse, and that safety planning must accompany restraining orders. Susie Flores of Inner Circle Children’s Advocacy Center explained the multidisciplinary forensic interview model used for child abuse cases, gave examples of severe abuse involving children exposed to domestic violence, and noted that many centers are overwhelmed by caseloads. She stressed the need for immediate trauma-informed services and more front-end intervention rather than waiting until long-term harm develops. Dr. Pamela Tate of Black Women Revolt Against Domestic Violence and other members discussed the need to support not only victims but also the systems and educators who are expected to respond. Several members shared personal experiences with domestic violence, sexual assault, and family trauma, and raised concerns about school implementation, immigrant families’ fear of reporting, and the need to address abusers’ behavior and trauma as well. The discussion also touched on statute of limitations issues, with panelists saying memory and trauma can delay disclosure for years and that rigid deadlines can prevent justice. No votes were taken; the meeting was informational and ended with members expressing support for continued collaboration, prevention funding, and stronger implementation of existing law.

Transcript Highlights:

• So I will open it up to anyone that would like to share. Today, our college day.
• Well, last time we had a homework assignment, I did not share my homework. Thank you.
• the right thing to do if I shared mine as well.
• That is not commonly shared across the country.
• I don't think that that is necessarily shared anymore.

Summary: The subcommittee began with an informal “college day” exercise in which members described what careers and colleges they would choose if starting over, often citing factors such as program reputation, location, cost, graduation rates, employment outcomes, and family or personal interests. Members mentioned a range of possible paths including law, aviation, education, construction management, psychology, social work, criminal justice, nursing, intelligence studies, and the arts. Several also highlighted the value of historically Black colleges and universities, dual enrollment, and career/technical education. The chair used the exercise to frame the meeting’s broader focus on Florida’s higher education pathways and student outcomes. Dr. Kathleen Plinsky of Valencia College then gave an overview of the Florida College System and Valencia’s role in it, emphasizing Florida’s statewide articulation and transfer framework, open-access mission, affordability, and workforce alignment. She described Valencia’s record enrollment, high retention, large share of first-generation and working students, and partnerships such as Direct Connect to UCF, Osceola Prosper, and Open Door grants for short-term training. Members asked about guaranteed transfer, apprenticeships, enrollment trends, student demographics, out-of-state residency, county scholarship costs, dual enrollment outcomes, and barriers to expanding career dual enrollment. Dr. Plinsky said the system supports transfer and acceleration well, but funding constraints limit growth in some areas; she also noted that dual enrollment participation is high and that Valencia’s affordability and student support efforts have driven recent enrollment gains. Dr. Jim Clark of Florida State University followed with an overview of the State University System, describing its governance, performance-based funding, low tuition, and strong graduation and research outcomes. He highlighted FSU’s enrollment, research profile, transfer student success, FSU Health, the National High Magnetic Field Laboratory, partnerships with K-12 schools and Tallahassee State College, and efforts to expand nursing and medical education to address workforce shortages. After the presentations, the committee heard from a panel on student acceleration and mobility: Shannon Mercer of the Department of Education explained the Office of Articulation, the statewide course numbering system, FASTER records, the 2+2 transfer model, specialized AA transfer degrees, and credit for industry certifications, military, medical, and law-enforcement training. Panelists from Kaiser University, Florida State University, and Pinellas County Schools described their institutions’ roles in transfer, advising, career pathways, apprenticeships, and dual enrollment. No formal votes or bills were taken up in the portion provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• I also think it's important to share with this committee that...
• The last part I will share with that is we were able to share over the past couple of years at the start
• I'm proud to share that we have. Chancellor, thank you very much.
• Surrency shared, you know, we do five-, ten-, and fifteen-day letters.
• So that has been a concern that we have shared.

Summary: The subcommittee first heard an overview from Department of Education Chancellor Paul Burns on Florida’s K-12 governance structure and major divisions, including early learning, public schools, safe schools, school choice, and accountability. He highlighted school readiness and VPK, teacher preparation and licensure, school safety functions, scholarship and virtual/home education programs, and FAST progress monitoring. Burns also cited statewide gains such as higher mid-year reading performance, a record graduation rate of 89.7%, and record CTE enrollment, while members questioned the meaning of Florida’s “number one” education rankings, teacher pay, post-COVID learning loss, vacancies, and chronic absenteeism. St. Lucie County Superintendent John Prince then described the scale and responsibilities of a mid-sized district, emphasizing student safety, transportation, meals, hurricane shelter operations, career and technical education, teacher recruitment and retention, progress monitoring, remediation, and mental health supports. Members asked about school shelter construction standards, remediation funding, late school start times, attendance, and concordance scores; Prince argued for more flexibility for CTE pathways and noted that local districts use a mix of state and federal funds to support remediation and staffing. The committee then moved to an early warning systems panel. Burns explained that Florida law requires districts to use attendance, behavior/suspensions, course performance, FAST results, and other academic indicators to identify students needing support, with districts and families developing intervention plans. Superintendents from Putnam, St. Johns, and St. Lucie counties said chronic absenteeism is tied to achievement and NAEP decline, but causes vary by district, including poverty, transportation, daycare, family instability, travel, and student athletics. They described MTSS, PBIS, home visits, attendance letters, and community partnerships as responses. Members also discussed VPK access, full-day VPK funding, excused versus unexcused absences, and the need for earlier intervention in pre-K and K-2. Finally, Vice Chancellor Darren Norris outlined Florida’s post-Parkland school safety measures, including armed school officers, anonymous reporting, behavioral threat assessment teams, mental health training, panic alert systems, emergency drills, active assailant response policies, and firearm detection canines. Superintendents said compliance is costly and often requires shifting local funds, but they praised state grants for mental health, hardening, and mapping. They noted ongoing challenges with new mandates, capital costs, manual reporting burdens, and the need to balance safety requirements with classroom resources.

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:

• And I share all of this because of the breadth of differences in California schools.
• We share and decide what the future path will look like.
• I share a lot of the thoughts that Assembly Member Lohenthal does and that. share a lot of the thoughts
• I want to share about how we got here.
• It shares with the public where the accountability lies and... ...that we need.

Summary: The committee heard several education-related bills, with the most extensive discussion focused on AB 2189, AB 2615, AB 2496, AB 1750, and AB 1644. AB 2189 would create an $800,000 grant program through the State Council on Developmental Disabilities to support a statewide parent network for special education advocacy and training. Supporters said families need stronger coordination and information to navigate special education, while an opponent argued the bill could duplicate existing family-led organizations. The bill passed 6-0 and was sent to Appropriations, held on call for add-on votes. AB 2615, a cleanup bill to AB 715 on antisemitism and instructional materials, drew the most controversy. The authors said it was intended to clarify prior commitments by removing references to professional responsibility standards, refining the “factually accurate” language, and clarifying how discriminatory materials are handled. Supporters said it would help protect students from discrimination, while many educators, civil rights groups, and other organizations opposed it unless amended, warning that the factual-accuracy language could chill teaching and be applied too broadly. The committee chair and members raised concerns about implementation but ultimately supported moving the bill forward; it passed 5-0 and was held on call. AB 2496 would streamline school accountability reporting by making the California School Dashboard the primary transparency tool, phasing out the School Accountability Report Card over time, and making mid-year LCAP reporting optional. Supporters said this would reduce duplication and administrative burden while preserving access to key data; opponents worried families could lose the simplicity and accessibility of the current SARC and that the mid-year update still serves an important purpose. The bill was approved 3-0 and held on call. AB 1750, which would extend full salary for an additional five months for school employees who exhaust sick leave due to illness or injury, was supported as a dignity and retention measure but opposed by administrators over staffing and cost concerns; it passed 4-0 and was held on call. AB 1644 would require a bell-to-bell smartphone ban in TK-8 and recommend it for high school, with exceptions for instructional and safety needs; supporters said phones are harming attention and learning, while opponents argued districts had just adopted local policies and needed more flexibility. The transcript ends during discussion of that bill.

Transcript Highlights:

• Willlette shared with us yesterday.
• Willlette shared with report that uh Mr. Willlette shared with us<00:03:58.000><c> yesterday.
• We're very grateful for the opportunity to share our support for 4343.
• Thank you for the opportunity to share some thoughts on this issue.
• Thank you for the opportunity to share some thoughts on this issue.

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• members shared it with, like our local presidents that we shared it with, said, 'Share to your special
• members shared it with like our local. discussions, if somebody shared that, you know, other members
• shared it with, like our local presidents that we shared it with, said, say, share to your special education
• But thank you for sharing.
• That'd be the local share.

Keywords: 908, all

Summary: The committee met to discuss special education funding and retention, beginning with approval of the prior meeting minutes and then hearing a presentation from North Dakota United on a statewide special education survey and retention rubric. Presenters described how the rubric and survey were developed from special educator input around four domains: paperwork and due process support, workload, student and staff safety, and paraprofessional management. They reported high levels of stress and burnout, including increased workload, difficulty taking prep and lunch time, concerns about mental health, and widespread difficulty filling special education positions. Committee members questioned the survey’s lack of a general-education comparison group, the interpretation of terms like “rarely” and “sometimes,” and whether results could be broken down further by district size, unit, or disability area. The survey results showed the weakest area was workload, with respondents reporting caseloads increasing without corresponding adjustments, little additional support or compensation when workloads rise, and few negotiated-agreement protections. Paperwork and due process also scored poorly, with many teachers saying they rarely receive dedicated time during the duty day, often work outside contract hours without compensation, and take work home on evenings and weekends. Student and staff safety scored somewhat better but still showed gaps in crisis follow-up, notification about violent behavior, protective gear, and leave options after incidents. Paraprofessional management also drew concern, especially low pay, insufficient staffing, limited administrative support, and the burden placed on teachers to supervise and train paras. Several teachers then testified directly about the practical impact of these issues. One special education teacher described the job as combining instruction, legal compliance, and paraprofessional supervision, often requiring work beyond contracted hours and contributing to burnout and turnover. Another testified that special education case managers are effectively doing three full-time jobs and that the paperwork and caseload demands are a major reason people avoid or leave the field. Committee members discussed whether the problems are primarily local or state-level, whether more funding would solve them, and whether changes to the funding formula or weighting for high-cost students might be needed. No formal vote or action was taken beyond a recess and return to order for the next presentation, which continued the discussion of possible special education study objectives and potential policy directions.

Transcript Highlights:

• And I think y'all share... ...I think y'all share.
• But I just wanted to quickly share that before I shared this statement that I prepared.
• And we all share that.
• And we all share that.
• I hope you don't mind me sharing.

Summary: The committee held an oversight discussion on Louisiana’s reentry landscape, with Chair Villio emphasizing that the hearing was informational only and that no bills were being considered. Department of Public Safety and Corrections officials outlined the state’s reentry mission and current programming in state facilities, local jails, regional reentry centers, and STEP facilities. They described services including literacy and GED preparation, career and technical education, industry certifications, postsecondary partnerships, mental health and substance abuse treatment, victim impact and trauma programming, and pre-release assistance such as state IDs, birth certificates, Social Security cards, Medicaid, SNAP, and driver’s licenses. Officials also discussed a new data-sharing MOU with DCFS for child support matters and a planned “return portal” with Louisiana Works to connect incarcerated people to jobs and training aligned with labor market needs. A major focus was the reentry court program at Angola for men and at the Louisiana Correctional Institute for Women. Assistant Secretary DeLouche and Assistant Warden Easley explained that the program is limited to nine judicial districts, requires judge and district attorney consent, and includes a two-year institutional phase followed by three years of intensive supervised probation. Participants must earn a HiSET if needed, complete multiple certifications and life-skills programs, and then petition for resentencing; officials said the program’s current recidivism rate is under 14 percent. They also highlighted specialized offerings such as vocational mentoring, a Braille transcription and repair program, and family-focused events like a father-daughter dance. Testimony from employers and local officials was broadly supportive. Eric Lane described hiring formerly incarcerated workers through the parole project and said the program solved problems he had seen with halfway-house placements by helping people secure housing, IDs, and licenses before release. Sheriff Kevin Cobb said sheriffs are active partners, with 51 of 64 parishes offering some form of programming and more than 75 percent of local facilities providing services; he stressed that local jail programming has grown over time and that data collection is improving. Members repeatedly asked for more data on recidivism, employment outcomes, and what programs are available by parish, and several praised the department and sheriffs for the work already being done. No votes were taken.

Transcript Highlights:

• </c><00:41:56.760><c> housing</c> like adus shared housing like adus shared housing intergenerational
• sharing and intergenerational home sharing and missing<00:41:59.800><c> middle</c><00:42:00.160><c>
• The review shared this with NHS England. End quote.
• One of the M.E.S. she shares about is Elijah.
• </c> makes this concerning the review shared makes this concerning the review shared this<01:22:08.760

Bills: HF1837, HF361, HF2725, HF2566, HF2744, HF1685, HF501, HF1889, HF1389

Keywords: state policy, employment, health insurance, fossil designation, public funds, community resources, Capitol Mall, grantmaking, community vitality, livability, funding, healthy aging, aging policy, older adults, seniors, elderly, gerontology, long-term care, assisted living, nursing homes

Transcript Highlights:

• </c> Minnesota Catholic conference to share Minnesota Catholic conference to share our<00:16:09.160><
• Thank you so much for sharing that.
• Thank you for this opportunity to share our concerns.
• Thank you for this opportunity to share our concerns.
• </c> difficult diagnoses to have to share difficult diagnoses to have to share with<01:20:43.320><c>

Keywords: 1183, house

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:

• 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