Transcript Highlights:

• So we defer on the policy outright to the administration.
• What does the deferred project list look like for community colleges?
• On deferred maintenance, we support the Governor's budget.
• We would request additional investments in deferred maintenance if revenues allow.
• On deferred maintenance, we support the governor's budget.

Summary: The committee heard an overview of the California Community Colleges budget proposal, including Proposition 98 funding, a 2.41% COLA for apportionments, enrollment growth funding, repayment of an apportionment deferral, and one-time investments for a student support block grant and deferred maintenance. The Department of Finance described the Governor’s package as providing significant new resources, while the LAO recommended prioritizing COLA and enrollment growth within available funds but raised concerns about some smaller proposals, including making the Healthy School Food Pathways Program ongoing and adding more funding for credit for prior learning before outcomes are known. The Chancellor’s Office supported the COLA, enrollment growth, and one-time investments, and said current projections suggest enrollment growth closer to 3%, with about $85 million to $90 million in ongoing costs if fully funded. Members focused heavily on enrollment growth, the 10% district cap, and whether the state should continue funding growth in the current year and budget year. The Chancellor’s Office said some districts, especially in the Inland Empire and Central Valley, are growing rapidly and that about seven districts are above the cap, with roughly 1,563 FTES and about $30 million in ongoing costs tied to that issue. Members also discussed hold-harmless districts and whether declining campuses should be required to produce turnaround or right-sizing plans. The Chancellor’s Office said districts are already having local conversations and that state funding provides time to adjust, but no formal plan requirement was proposed. The committee then took up common course numbering, where the Chancellor’s Office said all 115 community colleges have implemented the first phase and more than 550,000 students enrolled in the first six commonly numbered courses. The office argued that CCN improves clarity but does not yet guarantee that credits will transfer with full value across UC and CSU, because articulation is still handled campus by campus and can require more than 3,500 separate reviews. Members expressed concern that students can still be forced to retake courses such as calculus or ethnic studies even when they have the same common number, and urged the systems to develop a stronger statewide articulation mechanism tied to outcomes and transparency. The item was left open. Finally, the committee heard the Governor’s proposal to make Calbright College’s funding ongoing at $53.1 million. The LAO recommended instead transitioning Calbright to the student-centered funding formula, with one-time bridge funding in the meantime, arguing the Governor’s proposal lacks a clear enrollment-based rationale and performance expectations. Calbright’s leadership defended the college’s competency-based, flexible model for adult learners, citing more than 6,800 students served, over 2,200 certificates awarded, and wage gains for graduates; they said enrollment is expected to grow from about 7,000 students now to roughly 8,000 to 9,000 next year and around 10,000 over the next couple of years. Members pressed for clearer enrollment and funding data before deciding how Calbright should be funded going forward.

Transcript Highlights:

• Um, and we heard this last week about the expunction, um, of the, of those placed on deferred adjudication
• Will you defer to Mr. Rodriguez Ramos? Yes, sir. Thank you.
• dissemination of the evidence and must return the evidence back to the state or destroy it at the disposition
• To if they want to appeal, so cases don't necessarily end at disposition. And, and, uh.

Bills: HB47

Keywords: HB 47, Texas Tax Code, ad valorem taxes, property tax, voter-approval tax rate, tax rate election, taxing unit, injunction, taxpayer rights, property owner, local government finance, tax refund, attorney's fees, court costs, voter-approved tax increase, tax reform, municipal taxes, county taxes, school district taxes, bond election

Transcript Highlights:

• We heard this last week about the expunction. of those placed on deferred adjudication community supervision
• Will you defer to Rodriguez-Ramos? Yes, sir, thank you.
• dissemination of the evidence and must return the evidence back to the state or destroy it at the disposition
• I have an obligation to, if they want to appeal, so cases don't never . . . necessarily end at disposition

Bills: HB47, HB1552, HB1686, HB1953, HB2151, HB2355, HB2582, HB2697, HB2895, HB3073, HB3418, HB47

Keywords: sexual assault, victim rights, forensic examination, medical care, trauma-informed care, crime victims compensation, evidence retention, child sexual abuse material, child pornography, digital services, reporting requirements, children's protection, sex offender registration, indecent assault, educator-student relationship, criminal justice, legislation, crime victims, compensation fund, information disclosure

Transcript Highlights:

• body by law and authorize release of the body by law and authorize release of the body for final disposition
• on a certificate for final disposition on a certificate for final disposition on a certificate as prescribed
• body for shall authorize release of the body for shall authorize release of the body for final disposition
• by executing a final disposition by executing a final disposition by executing a certificate required

Bills: HJR 1, HB 9, HB 21, HB 26, HB 30, HB 37, HB 116, HB 630, HB 879, HB 913, HB 1151, HB 1318, HB 1593, HB 1899, HB 2703, HB 2809, HB 2890, HB 2970, HB 3307, HB 3526, HB 5092, SB 128, SB 203, SB 317, SB 393, SB 397, SB 644, SB 731, SB 801, SB 913, SB 1071, SB 1073, SB 1086, SB 1087, SB 1232, SB 1250, SB 1262, SB 1285, SB 1310, SB 1359, SB 1444, SB 1483, SB 1705, SB 1782, SB 1861, SB 1897, SB 1944, SB 2023, SB 2043, SB 2082, SB 2133, SB 2215, SB 2297, SB 2298, SB 2309, SB 2532, SB 2549, SB 2566, SB 2617, SB 2619, SB 2639, SB 2688, SB 2696, SB 2717, SB 2790, SB 2841, SB 2847, SB 2850, SB 2857, SB 2891, SB 2919, SB 2928, SB 2972, SB 3052, SB 3053, SB 1, SB 260, SB 1506, SB 1637, HB 37, HB 109, HB 334, HB 1130, HB 1238, HB 1327, HB 1610, HB 1615, HB 1620, HB 1689, HB 2081, HB 2809, HB 2884, HB 2890, HB 4215, HB 5092, HCR 7, HCR 75, HCR 86, HCR 92, HCR 93, HCR 126, SB 644, SB 1086, SB 1230, SB 1310, SB 1361, SB 1553, SB 1778, SB 1790, SB 2344, SB 2460, SB 2515, SB 2600, SB 2747, SB 2751, SB 2785, SB 2790, SB 3047, SB 3048, SB 3050, SB 3051, SB 3052, SB 3053, SB 3056, SB 3058, SB 3061, HJR 1, HB 1130, HB 1689, HB 2884, HB 1393, HB 2559, HB 26, HB 3012, HB 1327, HB 109, HB 1238, HB 2890, HB 9, HB 4215, HB 2970, HB 37, HB 1899, HB 1593, HB 2607, HB 3526, HB 3810, HB 5092, HB 388, HB 2809, HB 1151, HB 913, HB 3307, HB 879, HB 116, HB 12, HB 2703, HB 1610, HB 1615, HB 1620, HB 30, HB 21, HB 2712, HB 2692, HB 1633, HB 1318, HB 685, HB 630, HB 4753, HB 2742, HB 303, HB 198, HB 1535, HB 762, HB 148, HB 1520, HB 5061, HB 2286, HB 1606, HB 1041, HB 132, HB 11, HCR 7, HCR 75, HCR 86, HCR 92, HCR 93, HCR 126, SJR 36, SJR 50, SJR 63, SCR 12, SCR 39, SB 2023, SB 1310, SB 2972, SB 1073, SB 2847, SB 2532, SB 2619, SB 62, SB 666, SB 847, SB 284, SB 854, SB 810, SB 1505, SB 583, SB 507, SB 1434, SB 1772, SB 2016, SB 1122, SB 731, SB 397, SB 508, SB 1436, SB 287, SB 1882, SB 393, SB 1791, SB 209, SB 2429, SB 511, SB 2309, SB 1085, SB 1975, SB 2717, SB 1262, SB 636, SB 2056, SB 884, SB 1200, SB 1845, SB 2458, SB 801, SB 3014, SB 3013, SB 758, SB 2797, SB 2076, SB 2876, SB 1640, SB 1449, SB 1181, SB 1359, SB 1234, SB 2926, SB 2841, SB 1528, SB 2891, SB 1854, SB 317, SB 1250, SB 2082, SB 1285, SB 1237, SB 2819, SB 629, SB 2608, SB 1602, SB 2009, SB 2460, SB 867, SB 640, SB 1698, SB 2680, SB 2994, SB 2747, SB 913, SB 1071, SB 1086, SB 1087, SB 1483, SB 1444, SB 1553, SB 1556, SB 1703, SB 2133, SB 2297, SB 2298, SB 2622, SB 2955, SB 2334, SB 1861, SB 2043, SB 1367, SB 2857, SB 128, SB 3058, SB 2044, SB 2363, SB 2565, SB 1888, SB 3048, SB 3052, SB 3053, SB 3036, SB 3057, SB 3056, SB 3043, SB 3050, SB 3063, SB 3035, SB 1790, SB 1778, SB 203, SB 3061, SB 2799, SB 2790, SB 2688, SB 2515, SB 1230, SB 2522, SB 2639, SB 2459, SB 3051, SB 2655, SB 2251, SB 1884, SB 2617, SB 2751, SB 2928, SB 2566, SB 1897, SB 1749, SB 1361, SB 2549, SB 2553, SB 2919, SB 1782, SB 1705, SB 2696, SB 1944, SB 2215, SB 644, SB 1232, SB 2850, HB 45, HB 48, HB 1261, HB 1465, HB 1778, HB 2596, HB 5238, HB 33, HB 1188, HB 210, HB 1022, HB 1458, HB 5560, HB 1240, HB 1950, HB 2027, HB 2768, HB 2788, HB 2791, HB 3146, HB 3698, HB 3699, HB 1893, HB 3700, HB 4850, HB 4187, HB 1397, HB 4885, HB 4804, HB 3751, HB 3611, HB 2775, HB 2061, HB 2003, HB 1729, HB 1242, HB 791, HB 2029, HB 647, HB 2522, HB 4738, HB 3033, HB 3594, HB 3474, HB 2563, HB 2802, HCR 90, SJR 87, SB 2969, SB 3073, SB 2497, SB 1798, SB 2603, SB 2607, SB 781, SJR 34, SB 17, SB 314, SB 455, SB 509, SB 529, SB 541, SB 693, SB 761, SB 963, SB 1023, SB 1968, SB 2122, SB 2308, SB 2371, SB 2420, SB 2544, SJR 87, SB 1285, SB 1359, SB 2857, SB 3073, HJR 1, HB 9, HB 21, HB 116, HB 913, HB 1151, HB 1899, HB 2970, HB 3307, SB 1073, SB 1310, SB 2532, SB 2619, SB 2847, SB 2972, SB 128, SB 2043, SR 393, SR 511, SR 518, SR 520, SB 314, SB 455, SB 761, SB 1023, SB 2122, SB 2371, SB 2420, SB 17, SB 509, SB 644, SB 1230, SB 1361, SB 1778, SB 1790, SB 2460, SB 2515, SB 2747, SB 2751, SB 2790, SB 3048, SB 3050, SB 3051, SB 3052, SB 3053, SB 3056, SB 3058, SB 3061, HB 37, HB 109, HB 1130, HB 1238, HB 1327, HB 1610, HB 1615, HB 1620, HB 1689, HB 2809, HB 2884, HB 2890, HB 4215, HB 5092, HCR 7, HCR 75, HCR 86, HCR 92, HCR 93, HCR 126, SB 1086, SB 1553, HJR 182, HB 4, HB 24, HB 46, HB 101, HB 146, HB 170, HB 214, HB 305, HB 426, HB 549, HB 551, HB 594, HB 722, HB 824, HB 1119, HB 1579, HB 2215, HB 2458, HB 2530, HB 2674, HB 2713, HB 2974, HB 3015, HB 3151, HB 3180, HB 3221, HB 3359, HB 3556, HB 4088, HB 4211, HB 4396, HB 4413, HB 4580, HB 4609, HB 4864, HB 5088, HB 5154, HB 5263, HB 2294, HJR 182, HB 4, HB 24, HB 46, HB 101, HB 146, HB 170, HB 214, HB 305, HB 426, HB 549, HB 551, HB 594, HB 722, HB 824, HB 1119, HB 1579, HB 2215, HB 2458, HB 2530, HB 2674, HB 2713, HB 2974, HB 3015, HB 3151, HB 3180, HB 3221, HB 3359, HB 3556, HB 4088, HB 4211, HB 4396, HB 4413, HB 4580, HB 4609, HB 4864, HB 5088, HB 5154, HB 5263, HB 2294

Keywords: constitutional amendment, property tax, ad valorem tax, tax exemption, tangible personal property, income-producing property, business personal property, equipment exemption, machinery, local government finance, school district revenue, county taxes, Texas Constitution, Article VIII, tax relief, commercial property, appraisal district, chief appraiser, rendition statement, property tax relief

Transcript Highlights:

• In addition to procurement guidelines, as you know, Chapter 30B covers disposition of publicly owned
• The only proper final disposition for artificial turf is in a well-lined landfill.
• I'll defer then to my colleague, Michael, from Somerville also, and let him finish. Thank you.

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The Joint Committee on State Administration and Regulatory Oversight heard testimony on several procurement-related bills. Senator Lovely and steel industry witnesses supported S. 2167/H. 3411, which would require preference for U.S. manufacturers on public construction projects using steel and other materials. They argued that Canadian and other foreign fabricators underbid Massachusetts firms because of exchange rates, subsidies, and different labor-cost structures, causing local job losses and economic leakage. Committee members asked about tariffs, market share, and whether the bill should be folded into broader municipal legislation; the witnesses said public work should stay in Massachusetts and that the bill would help preserve local industry and jobs. The committee also heard strong support for S. 2107, a bill to increase employment opportunities for people with disabilities in state and municipal contracting. Work Inc. testified that a preference for contractors employing people with disabilities would expand competitive employment, reduce reliance on public assistance, and generate net savings for taxpayers. Members asked about the estimated savings and whether recent federal changes to benefits would affect the numbers; the witness said the figures may need updating but that the underlying employment opportunity remains important. Another bill, H. 3339/S. 2187, would prohibit state and municipal contracts for new artificial turf fields containing zinc, plastic, or intentionally added PFAS. Sponsors and supporters cited health risks, heat retention, injuries, and PFAS contamination, while committee members discussed local bans, disposal problems, and whether indoor facilities or alternative materials could be used. Inspector General Jeffrey Shapiro testified in favor of H. 12 and H. 13, which would update Chapter 30B procurement thresholds and allow municipalities to bundle snow hauling and removal with plowing contracts. He said the changes would give local governments more flexibility, reduce confusion between school and municipal procurement rules, and make snow contracts more attractive to vendors. Members questioned whether quasi-public agencies and state entities should also be subject to 30B, and Shapiro said many public entities have their own procedures but that transparency and fairness should apply across the board. The committee also heard support for S. 2150, a software licensing bill aimed at preventing vendor lock-in by ensuring state agencies can run purchased software in the infrastructure that best fits their needs; the witness said restrictive licensing can drive up costs and create cybersecurity and modernization problems, and that similar laws have already passed in several other states.

Transcript Highlights:

• And then around dispositional decision-making, the state right now does not use a validated risk screening
• or assessment tool to inform different decisions—diversion, disposition, supervision decisions.
• So I would just simply defer to the lawyers that brought the case.

Transcript Highlights:

• Now, these data that I created here use that disposition code.
• You can see near the right side where it says disposition that's FIL.
• Well, in this disposition, I guess I'm looking at— I mean, they're identical in the case ID.
• I'll just note that we have seen a pretty significant increase in our special disposition alternatives
• And just as a reminder, for disposition alternatives, by statute the level of offense at sentencing matters

Summary: The committee heard testimony on the effects of H.R. 1 on Washington’s Medicaid, developmental disability, long-term care, and food assistance systems, followed by a separate discussion of juvenile rehabilitation caseloads and placement capacity. DSHS officials said HR1 could affect home equity rules, immigration-related eligibility, work requirements for some expansion-population enrollees, and provider taxes, while also creating a future opportunity for a new 1915(c) waiver. Advocates and providers warned that any state response that cuts home and community-based services would worsen already thin provider networks, increase waiting lists, push more people into hospitals or out-of-state placements, and strain families and workers. A pediatric behavioral health expert and a supported living provider said Medicaid reimbursement is already too low and further reductions would threaten outpatient, residential, and inpatient services for people with intellectual and developmental disabilities and severe behavioral needs. The committee then turned to SNAP and the state food assistance program. DSHS said HR1 would tighten work requirements and exemptions, end some immigrant eligibility for the federal program, eliminate the SNAP education program, raise state administrative costs, and eventually require Washington to share in benefit costs based on its error rate. Officials estimated large numbers of residents could lose or see reduced benefits, with significant added state costs. Anti-hunger advocates, a food bank director, and a SNAP recipient described the program as essential for low-income families, seniors, and people with disabilities, and said the changes would increase paperwork, reduce benefits, and worsen food insecurity while also harming local food economies. Testimony emphasized that food banks cannot replace SNAP and that work requirements may be difficult to meet for caregivers, people with disabilities, and those facing child care or transportation barriers. In the juvenile justice portion, the Caseload Forecast Council presented the JR forecast, which is currently mostly flat through the end of the biennium but expected to grow modestly over the longer term. Members discussed how policy choices, including the 2019 JR-25 law, have increased lengths of stay for adult-sentenced youth in JR, while diversion and other reforms have affected regular JR trends. A court researcher explained the data available to help forecast admissions and noted ongoing efforts to improve data sharing with JR, AOC, and county systems, though staffing and system-lag issues limit how quickly data can be produced. Juvenile court administrators and DCYF officials described the community-based juvenile justice continuum, rising complexity in the JR population, overcrowding at Green Hill and placement constraints at Echo Glen and Harbor Heights, and the need for more flexible community transition and mental health capacity. No votes were taken.

Transcript Highlights:

• > positive then obviously any action any positive then obviously any action any positive disposition
• we took on the amendment disposition we took on the amendment would<00:19:28.840> be<00:19:29.000
• It's not required cuz it's not final disposition. Okay. I'll do a division vote if that's okay.
• :05.200> final It's not required cuz it's not final It's not required cuz it's not final disposition
• . disposition. disposition.

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• >> I will defer to the municipal association.
• They had a suggestion to me on some wordsmithing on the definition of these terms, and I'll defer to
• It might come down to the county delegation if there's nobody else there. of these terms and I'll defer
• to of these terms and I'll defer to municipal<01:53:09.920> to<01:53:10.400> uh<01:53:
• EPC projects which address deferred EPC projects which address deferred maintenance<03:32:28.239

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• But the youth might be there until they go to final disposition.
• Chair, to present our legislative budget request and defer to the Legislature on its ability to fund
• but I'm very proud of the agency that I've been a part of for the last 14 and a half years, and I defer

Summary: The Justice Budget Subcommittee met for an introductory overview of the justice budget and the major agencies within it. Chair Maney explained that the committee would hear broad presentations rather than detailed budget questions, and the first panel included the Department of Juvenile Justice, Department of Corrections, Commission on Offender Review, Department of Law Enforcement, Office of the State Courts Administrator, and the Attorney General’s Office. Each agency described its mission, staffing, budget, and major responsibilities, with repeated emphasis on public safety, rehabilitation, staffing shortages, technology needs, and the importance of mental health services and education in reducing recidivism. Secretary Hall described DJJ’s prevention-to-aftercare continuum, including civil citation, detention, probation, and residential commitment programs, and highlighted reductions in juvenile arrests and commitments. Secretary Dixon said DOC’s biggest issues are staffing, overtime, and inflation, while noting progress in education, reentry, and a low recidivism rate. FDLE Commissioner Glass outlined the agency’s investigative, forensic, intelligence, and protective functions, including work on fentanyl enforcement and crime reporting systems. The State Courts Administrator emphasized the judiciary’s constitutional role, case volume, and challenges in providing interpreters, experts, and technology support. Chief Deputy Attorney General Guard described the office’s litigation, criminal appeals, consumer protection, and opioid recovery work, especially defending state laws and recovering opioid settlement funds. Members then asked questions about prison conditions, immigration enforcement, court filing fees, crime reporting, staffing ratios, and transnational gangs. Agency leaders responded that they were not aware of ICE contracts in some cases, that FDLE works with immigration authorities and detention facilities under existing authority, and that filing fees are a legislative policy decision. The committee also heard from the Justice Administrative Commission, prosecutors, public defenders, guardian ad litem, regional conflict counsel, and capital collateral regional counsel, who focused on indigent representation, dependency and death penalty cases, and persistent staffing and retention problems. No votes were taken, and the meeting concluded after the presentations and questions.

Transcript Highlights:

• The Acquisitions and Restoration Council is required to evaluate requests for the disposition of conservation
• With requests for land exchange involving the disposition of conservation land, the governor and the
• So on slide number seven, you talk about the disposition of conservation land and how Article 10, Section
• And I'm not sure; I'm not familiar with the water management district dispositions.

Summary: The committee first received a Department of Environmental Protection presentation on Florida Forever and the sale or exchange of conservation lands. DEP described Florida Forever as the state’s main conservation land acquisition program, funded in recent years at high levels, and said most acquisitions since 2019 have been within the Florida Wildlife Corridor. The presentation also explained the legal process for disposing of conservation lands: requests are reviewed by the Acquisitions and Restoration Council, then the governor and cabinet decide whether land is no longer needed for conservation or whether an exchange provides a net conservation benefit. Senator Smith asked several questions about recent land-swap proposals, public notice, political influence, and whether any transactions had bypassed the usual sequence; DEP said applications can be withdrawn before ARC review, notice is posted seven days in advance, and the council and cabinet are the decision-makers. Senator Harrington asked about the difference between Florida Forever land sales and water management district surplus lands, and DEP said the reported 2.3 acres sold referred only to Florida Forever-funded projects. The committee then heard presentations from the Department of Health and DEP on PFAS and PFOA. DOH outlined what PFAS are, their common uses, possible health impacts, and ways Floridians can reduce exposure, including water filtration and avoiding certain products. DOH said it conducts well investigations, health consultations, fish consumption advisories, and monitoring in coordination with DEP and FWC. DEP followed with a more technical overview of PFAS regulation and cleanup, explaining federal testing and drinking-water standards, Florida’s provisional cleanup levels, and the state’s response at contaminated sites, including bottled water and filtration for affected residents. Senators asked about testing requirements for public systems and private wells, disposal of used filters, and how federal rulemaking and litigation could affect Florida’s standards; DEP said public systems are required to test under EPA monitoring rules, private wells are not directly required to test, and Florida may adopt its own standards if federal action does not occur by the statutory deadline. Finally, the committee took up SB 150, which would designate the flamingo as the state bird and the scrub jay as the state songbird. The sponsor argued the bill better reflects Florida’s identity and conservation values, noting the flamingo’s iconic status and the scrub jay’s status as a Florida-only species. Members asked lighthearted questions about mockingbirds, flamingo color, and feeding costs, and an appearance card was filed in support by the Association of Zoos and Aquariums. The committee debated the bill briefly and then passed SB 150 favorably by roll call vote, with all members present voting yes except Senator DiCeglie, who was excused.

Transcript Highlights:

• It places time limits on the disposition of summary judgment motions and adds to the definition of willful
• They can see the disposition rate of courts across the state.
• resolved through default judgment motions, summary judgment motions, agreed judgments, and other dispositive
• that are waiting for them, because those things also move cases forward. ...and move cases toward disposition

Bills: HB4011, HB2680, HB4325, HB4327, HB4944, HB1761, HB4688, HB3453, HB40, HB1707, HB4749, HB2322, HB3647, HB4139, HB4081, HB2203, HB2100, HB4170, HB3104, HB4623, HB40

Keywords: partition, heirs' property, real estate, co-ownership, family property, non-heir cotenant, right of first refusal, pilot services, liability limitation, maritime commerce, Matagorda Bay, Lavaca Bay, transportation code, maritime industry, civil liability, barratry, penalties, legal actions, damages, wrongful death

Transcript Highlights:

• If you're here for H.R. 285 with Representative Brass, he's asked us to defer this bill, so H.R. 285.
• If you're here for H.R. 285 with Representative Brass, he's asked us to defer this bill, so H.R. 285.
• We simply ask that our essential services no longer be deferred.

Bills: HR118, HR196, HR237, HR285, HCR85, HB442, HB443, SCR5, SCR29, SCR33, SCR63, SB25, SB202, SB319

Keywords: water utility, tax credit, excessive rates, residential service, subcommittee, fallen trees, property damage, insurance, property values, hurricanes, storm damage, local government, homeowners, risk management, committee study, census, military population, Department of Defense, representation, federal funding

Transcript Highlights:

• For one-time expenditures, we would encourage you to think about deferred maintenance and instructional
• For one-time expenditures, we would encourage you to think about deferred maintenance and instructional
• And as our previous colleagues have said, I'd love to see some funding for deferred maintenance restored
• And while we would defer to the Chancellor's Office on more detail, we believe that this investment is
• We are still determining the legal disposition of the returned funding because it's not clear under statute

Summary: The Assembly Budget Subcommittee on Education Finance held a hearing focused on California Community College budget proposals. Chair Alvarez opened by emphasizing the system’s role in access, transfer, workforce training, and serving more than 2 million students, while also noting persistent challenges in enrollment, persistence, transfer, and graduation. Public commenters and system representatives broadly supported COLA, enrollment growth funding, deferred maintenance, student support block grants, and additional flexibility for districts facing uncertainty. The first major panel covered the student-centered funding formula, COLA, and enrollment growth. The Department of Finance said the Governor proposes a 2.43% COLA ($230.4 million) and 0.5% enrollment growth funding ($30.4 million). The LAO said the COLA was reasonable and recommended funding at least the proposed growth amount, citing uneven enrollment recovery and regional differences. The Chancellor’s Office supported both proposals and asked for additional changes, including using the greater of current-year or three-year average for apportionments and lifting the 10% local enrollment cap, arguing these would better fund growing districts. Members questioned how the formula works, whether SCFF is improving outcomes, and how much additional funding would be needed under different growth scenarios. The committee then reviewed categorical program COLAs, Rising Scholars, career education proposals, IT proposals, and student housing. The Governor proposed a 2.43% COLA for selected categorical programs ($31.9 million). For Rising Scholars, the Governor proposed $30 million ongoing and removal of the cap on participating colleges; the LAO urged waiting for outcome data before doubling funding, while the Chancellor’s Office said the program is serving more students and supports equity for justice-impacted students. On career education, the Governor proposed $50 million for credit for prior learning and $50 million for a career passport; the LAO supported more reporting on credit for prior learning but recommended rejecting the career passport as too undefined, while the Chancellor’s Office supported both. On technology, the Governor proposed $162.5 million for a common cloud data platform and $168 million for a common ERP system; the LAO said both were premature or lacked sufficient planning and recommended rejection, while the Chancellor’s Office argued they would improve real-time data, security, and systemwide efficiency. The committee also heard an update on student housing: the administration said the 2024 shift to a lease-revenue bond model remains in progress for 13 approved projects, with 11 still active, and members asked about withdrawn projects and possible use of any returned funds. No votes were taken, and several items were held open for further discussion and May Revision updates.

Transcript Highlights:

• Um, but I just want to add that what members of the public who came to testify said is not dispositive
• testify<00:39:51.520> said<00:39:51.920> is<00:39:52.240> not<00:39:52.560> dispositive
• <00:39:53.680> of<00:39:53.920> what testify said is not dispositive of what testify
• said is not dispositive of what the<00:39:54.400> intent<00:39:54.800> of<00:39:54.960
• Sharia law and political Islam represent an existential threat to the state and country and that any deference

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• It's not for deferred or straight probation; it's only for those on pre-trial intervention programs.
• previous cases, precedent, and it drastically misapplied the rational basis test without giving deference
• I'll defer to them. They'll answer it a little better than I will.
• And we need to continue to decide all the issues related to this case, including the disposition of property
• It is handled the same in Chapter 18 with other dispositions of property, and the language is very similar

Bills: HB 1194, HB 1221, HB1738, HB1913, HB2177, HB2178, HB2180, HB2229, HB2282, HB2448, HB2492, HB2777, HB2984, HB3357, HB3553, HB3602

Keywords: emergency protection order, protective order, magistrate, criminal procedure, victim safety, family violence, domestic violence, stalking, assault, magistrate's order, temporary protection, court order duration, defendant restrictions, Article 17.292, Texas Code of Criminal Procedure, emergency restraining order, victim protection, firearm restriction, pretrial intervention, reimbursement fee

Transcript Highlights:

• <00:21:26.960> hearing<00:21:27.720> Mental of Court a dispositional hearing Mental
• of Court a dispositional hearing Mental Health<00:21:28.600> assessment<00:21:28.960> for<
• The first thing I want to talk about is the mandatory detention at disposition of the case, which is
• Judges already have the ability to detain much earlier than disposition, and they can do it taking into
• Disposition and they can do it, taking into account the gravity of the offense, the community response

Keywords: 958, all

Summary: The committee first took up House Bill 669, sponsored by Representative Smith, which was presented as a response to a September shooting incident in his district that led to school closures and missed instructional days. Smith said the bill was intended to help school districts recover lost days caused by extraordinary emergencies and not to set a broad precedent. Members asked whether districts had adjusted calendars to make up time, and Smith said many had already extended days or moved calendars into June. The committee then voted to pass House Bill 669, with all members present voting yes. The committee next heard House Bill 621, as amended by a committee substitute that removed a homeschooling-related section and left only the school-threat provisions. The bill would allow courts to impose a fine on parents when a child is adjudicated for terroristic threatening if law enforcement incurred excessive costs, and it would require a mental health assessment for the child. Representative Duvall and Officer Steve Chappelle supported the measure, arguing that online school threats spread fear, disrupt attendance, pull law-enforcement resources from other schools, and should create more parental accountability. Representative Riley also supported the accountability goal, citing lost instructional time and a recent student suicide tied to online issues. Several members raised concerns about the bill’s scope and due process. Representative Josh Callaway questioned why this offense should be the starting point for parental fines and warned about a slippery slope in holding parents liable for children’s crimes. Representative Willner said the bill seemed more like a judiciary issue, questioned whether punishment can make parents better parents, and asked about diversion programs and the meaning of the detention language. Representative Tipton pointed to existing statutes on mental health assessments and terroristic threatening penalties, and said the committee substitute would alleviate many concerns. Scott West, speaking for Kentucky Policy and the Kentucky Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers, argued that the mandatory detention language would remove judicial discretion and that the parental fine provision could conflict with existing due process protections requiring notice, a hearing, and a finding that lack of supervision was a substantial factor in the child’s delinquency. The transcript does not show a final vote on House Bill 621 in the portion provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• would I guess I would ask if the chair is interested in looking at that amendment before taking a dispositive
• would I guess I would ask if the chair is interested in looking at that amendment before taking a dispositive
• would I guess I would ask if the chair is interested in looking at that amendment before taking a dispositive
• would I guess I would ask if the chair is interested in looking at that amendment before taking a dispositive
• I would just like to say that HB 770 is facing the disposition of ITL, and I just want to thank and congratulate

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The committee first took up HB 112, which would require students in the University and Community College systems to pass the U.S. citizenship civics naturalization test. A motion was made to retain the bill, and the committee voted unanimously to retain it, resulting in no report. HB 510, dealing with due process rights for students, student organizations, and faculty in higher education disciplinary proceedings, was passed over for a later meeting so the University and Community College systems could meet with the committee. The committee then discussed HB 659, creating a college graduate retention incentive program, but retained it without further debate after noting the prime sponsor was unavailable. HB 770, concerning tuition credits for community service, was also held for later in the day because an amendment was expected. The most extensive discussion centered on HB 583, which would have the state participate in Medicaid direct certification for free and reduced-price school meals. Supporters argued it would identify more eligible students, reduce paperwork, improve accuracy in school funding formulas, and bring in additional federal child care scholarship money; opponents argued it would significantly affect school funding calculations and should be delayed. The committee rejected the amendment by a 10-8 vote and then voted 10-8 to retain the bill, with a majority report and minority report to follow. HB 646, requiring school districts to establish an online application for free and reduced-price meal participation, was also debated. One member said many districts already do this voluntarily and that the bill was unnecessary; another proposed an amendment to convert the mandate into a grant program to offset startup costs, but the committee proceeded on the underlying motion and voted 10-8 to retain the bill, with a majority report and a minority OTP report. HB 665, concerning eligibility for the free school meals program, was then retained by an 11-3 vote. Finally, the committee began work on HB 703, which would prohibit school districts from denying meals to students with unpaid balances and appropriate funds for that purpose. An amendment was explained that would remove state payment of district meal debt and instead require district policies against shaming or bullying students and allow voluntary donations to reduce debt. After discussion, a motion was made to ITL the bill, with the sponsor saying constituents opposed subsidizing the program and wanted districts to retain collection tools; further debate was underway when the transcript ended.

Transcript Highlights:

• I'll defer to your numbers.
• than an election... fraud where a an official or a group of individuals... seeks to change the disposition
• It may depend on whether it's a federal election, but I will defer to you on federal law. U.S.
• During that time, it was only if the local prosecutor in the county deferred.

Bills: SB5, SB11, SB12, SB9, SB42, SB15, SB5, SB11, SB12, SCR1

Keywords: hemp regulation, consumable products, cannabinoids, occupational licenses, criminal offenses, SB 11, Texas attorney general, election crimes, election law enforcement, criminal prosecution, Election Code, Government Code Chapter 402, local prosecutors, county attorney, district attorney, grand jury, probable cause reports, state election offenses, voter fraud, election integrity

Transcript Highlights:

• On Wednesday, HB 1983 was heard and was deferred. Why?
• As Anapyah has mentioned in this and other bills and other meetings, it was deferred.
• was heard and was deferred. was heard and was deferred.
• And in her testimony, it was deferred.
• , we saw it yesterday with disposition, we saw it yesterday with Congress<02:11:38.719> and<02

Keywords: 910, house, all

Summary: The committee heard testimony on House Bill 2046, which would establish and fund an Olo Hawaii Commission to coordinate and promote initiatives supporting the use of Olo Hawaii. The Attorney General suggested adding an end date because the bill creates a temporary commission, and several supporters from the University of Hawaii, Office of Hawaiian Affairs, and the Hawaii Civil Rights Commission said the commission could improve coordination, funding decisions, and consistency across agencies. Members discussed whether the commission should include broader representation, including expertise on Niihau dialect speakers and other stakeholders, and the bill was then set aside as the committee moved to the next measure. The committee next considered House Bill 2438, creating the Hawaii Cultural Trust within DBEDT, authorizing an income tax credit for contributions to the trust and qualified cultural organizations, and creating a special license plate to support the trust. DBEDT said it would need additional resources, including staff, to administer the program. The Department of Taxation recommended changing the effective date to 2026 to allow time for implementation and adding a requirement that credits be claimed within one year. OHA supported the bill but objected to language that would require it to maintain a prequalified list of organizations, saying that could limit applicants and conflict with its grant process. The Tax Foundation said it supported cultural funding but preferred direct appropriations and grants over a trust fund and tax credit structure. The final measure discussed was House Bill 2584, which would temporarily increase public land trust revenues transferred to OHA while reaffirming the state’s obligation to the 20% pro rata share, with a repeal date of June 30, 2028. The Attorney General recommended deleting the bill’s requirement that OHA receive a minimum amount equal to the 20% share, arguing the constitution and Admission Act do not specify a precise dollar amount and that the legislature must determine allocation. OHA strongly supported the bill, arguing the state currently pays only about 5% and that historical records show much higher amounts are owed; OHA also pointed to a carry-forward account it said held about $55 million. DLNR opposed the bill because the fiscal impact was unspecified and could affect land management and special fund budgets. Several OHA trustees and supporters urged the committee to pass the bill, and one testifier criticized the state for underfunding Native Hawaiian obligations. No votes were taken in the portion provided, and the committee continued hearing testimony on HB 2584.