Transcript Highlights:

• The act also made the judicial branch responsible for court facility construction.
• The act also made the judicial branch responsible for court facility construction.
• The judicial branch. As I often tell the public, we don't control the purse.
• And I stand with our judicial branch in increasing their funding statewide.
• Yeah, Senator Trowbog, there is not a formula to fund the judicial branch.

Summary: The Senate Budget Subcommittee on Corrections, Public Safety, Judiciary, Labor, and Transportation held a hearing focused on courthouse facility funding and the Governor’s budget proposals for the judicial branch. The Legislative Analyst’s Office outlined the state’s courthouse funding structure, including the Trial Court Facilities Act, the main facility funds, the fixed county facility payment, and the heavy reliance on General Fund backfill. LAO also explained that the state’s construction funds were depleted after large transfers and declining fine-and-fee revenue, leaving a backlog of roughly 80 construction projects and more than 22,000 deferred maintenance projects statewide. Members and witnesses discussed the long timelines for capital projects, the need for reassessments, and the impact of inflation, CEQA, and site acquisition delays. Judicial branch representatives, including Justice Hill, Judge Moorman, and Judge Tapia, testified that courthouses across the state face serious seismic, ADA, security, and maintenance problems. They described cost-cutting efforts in design and construction, but emphasized that many facilities are aging and unsafe, with examples from Los Angeles, Compton, Ukiah, and other courts involving flooding, elevator failures, asbestos issues, and closures that disrupted thousands of cases. Judge Moorman highlighted the Ukiah courthouse replacement as an example of a project that is on time and on budget and would improve access, safety, and community services. Judge Tapia stressed that deferred maintenance in Los Angeles County alone exceeds $1.4 billion and argued that preventive maintenance is fiscally prudent because emergency repairs and closures are more costly. Committee members pressed the panel on how priorities are set, whether caseload and population growth are adequately reflected, how quickly projects can be accelerated, and what level of funding would actually meet statewide needs. The Department of Finance and Judicial Council staff explained that the county contribution is fixed and not inflation-adjusted, that acquisitions require willing sellers and can be delayed by CEQA and market conditions, and that the Judicial Council’s prioritization process was based on 2019 criteria that may need updating. LAO cautioned that any new General Fund commitment would require tradeoffs with other state priorities and suggested the Legislature decide what level of funding it is willing to support. The committee also reviewed the Governor’s budget proposals for courthouse facilities, which include backfill for the construction fund, selected new construction and judgeship-related projects, and major facility modifications such as the Orange County Central Justice Center and relocation of Los Angeles courtrooms from the Spring Federal Building.

Transcript Highlights:

• The act also made the judicial branch responsible for court facility construction.
• And I stand with our judicial branch in increasing their funding statewide.
• that goes into funding every space that is needed within that judicial branch?
• Yeah, Senator Trowbog, there is not a formula to fund the judicial branch.
• And then the judicial branch would still come forward with specific projects.

Transcript Highlights:

• The act also made the judicial branch responsible for court facility construction.
• And I stand with our judicial branch in increasing their funding statewide.
• that goes into funding every space that is needed within that judicial branch?
• Yeah, Senator Trowbog, there is not a formula to fund the judicial branch.
• And then the judicial branch would still come forward with specific projects.

Summary: The Senate Budget Subcommittee on Corrections, Public Safety, Judiciary, Labor, and Transportation held a hearing focused first on courthouse facility funding and then on the Governor’s proposed court facilities budget. Legislative Analyst’s Office staff outlined the state’s court-facilities funding structure, including the 2002 shift of trial court facility responsibility from counties to the state, the main funding accounts, the insolvency of the construction fund, the move to General Fund support, the backlog of deferred maintenance, and the large estimated cost of needed new construction and repairs. Judicial Council representatives and judges from Los Angeles and Mendocino described severe seismic, safety, ADA, security, and maintenance problems, with examples of floods, elevator failures, asbestos-related closures, and long-delayed or underfunded projects. They argued that chronic underinvestment is making facilities less safe and more expensive to maintain, and that courthouse conditions directly affect access to justice and public confidence. Committee members pressed witnesses on how projects are prioritized, whether population and filing volume are adequately reflected, why reassessments have not been updated since 2019, how long acquisitions and construction take, and what level of funding would actually close the gap. Members also questioned the fixed county contribution, the use of General Fund backfills, and whether the state should set a clearer long-term funding target for the judicial branch. LAO staff emphasized that any new General Fund commitment would require tradeoffs with other budget priorities and said the Legislature must decide its appetite for funding. Judicial Council staff said the current prioritization was based on the 2019 reassessment and trailer bill language, that a new reassessment would cost about $14 million, and that acquisition delays are often driven by willing-seller issues and CEQA requirements. The chair asked for written testimony and indicated the committee would consider a future field hearing. In the second panel, Judicial Council and Department of Finance representatives reviewed the Governor’s budget proposals for court facilities. They said the proposal includes continued backfill for the State Court Facilities Construction Fund, several new construction and reappropriation items, relocation of Los Angeles courtrooms from the Spring Federal Building, and completion of a fire/life-safety project in Orange County. A court executive from Ventura testified that courthouse conditions affect public trust, employee morale, and the quality of service, citing roof leaks, elevator breakdowns, and HVAC failures as examples of why sustained facilities funding is needed.

Transcript Highlights:

• So, um I'm judicial branch so much.
• So um I do think that judicial branch.
• </c> in the judicial branch. So thank you. in the judicial branch. So thank you.
• And so if we are to be advocates for the judicial branch, the judicial branch has to come and tell us
• And so if we are to be advocates for the judicial branch, the judicial branch has to come and tell us

Transcript Highlights:

• And a calm and measured report regarding the important work our judicial branch has undertaken over this
• This year, the Judicial Branch plans to celebrate the unique role we play and the privilege we have to
• In recent years, it is true that the judicial branch...
• The judicial branch is laying a strong foundation with its model policies, training programs, and...
• I'm grateful for the vision, dedication, and hard work of the judicial branch leaders and Judicial Council

Summary: The Legislature recessed into a joint convention for the 2026 State of the Judiciary, escorted the California Supreme Court justices to the rostrum, and heard remarks from legislative leaders and Chief Justice Patricia Guerrero. The speakers emphasized judicial independence, the rule of law, and the importance of the courts as a co-equal branch of government. The Chief Justice framed her address as a calm report on the judiciary’s work and major challenges, while thanking legislative and executive partners for collaboration. Chief Justice Guerrero highlighted several policy and operational issues facing the courts. She urged continued support for remote proceedings, noting more than 6 million remote hearings since 2022 and strong user satisfaction, and discussed the CARE Act’s statewide implementation, including petition and agreement numbers and the recent expansion to cover certain bipolar disorders. She also raised concerns about judicial security and privacy, threats and negative rhetoric toward judges, courthouse access issues tied to federal immigration enforcement, and the need for more judgeships and funding in high-need counties such as Riverside and San Bernardino. She also discussed the judiciary’s response to artificial intelligence, including guidance on generative AI, deepfakes, and evidence admissibility, and reported corrective actions after the troubled February 2025 bar exam, including scoring adjustments, expanded provisional licensing, and a return to in-person testing. Additional points included proposed ongoing funding for trial courts, long-standing judicial salary disparities, and the Judicial Council’s 100th anniversary. No votes were taken; the joint convention concluded with the address ordered printed in the Journal and an invitation to a reception for members and guests.

Transcript Highlights:

• And a calm and measured report regarding the important work our judicial branch has undertaken over this
• This year, the Judicial Branch plans to celebrate the unique role we play and the privilege we have to
• In recent years, it is true that the judicial branch... ...on.
• The judicial branch is laying a strong foundation with its model policies, training programs, and...
• I'm grateful for the vision, dedication, and hard work of the judicial branch leaders and Judicial Council

Summary: The Legislature convened in joint convention for the 2026 State of the Judiciary, escorting Chief Justice Patricia Guerrero and the Associate Justices to the rostrum and recognizing statewide constitutional officers in attendance. Legislative leaders welcomed the court and framed the address around the importance of judicial independence, equal justice, and the judiciary’s role in California’s democracy. Chief Justice Guerrero reported on several major judicial branch priorities. She emphasized rising threats to judges and court security, the need to extend authority for remote proceedings beyond its current sunset, and the ongoing implementation of the CARE Act in all 58 counties, including data on petitions, agreements, and plans. She also discussed trial court funding and persistent judgeship shortages, especially in Riverside and San Bernardino counties, where congested calendars have led to case dismissals and heavy use of temporary assigned judges. The Chief Justice also addressed the judiciary’s response to artificial intelligence, including guidance on generative AI, deepfakes, and evidence issues, as well as concerns about federal immigration enforcement at courthouses and its effect on access to justice. She reviewed corrective actions after the February 2025 bar exam problems, including scoring adjustments, a return to in-person testing, and rule changes for attorney admissions. She closed by noting judicial salary concerns, the 100th anniversary of the Judicial Council, and the need for continued collaboration with the Governor and Legislature. No votes were taken. The joint convention ordered the State of the Judiciary address printed in the Journal as a separate appendix and then adjourned, with an invitation extended to a reception with the Chief Justice later that evening.

Transcript Highlights:

• Senate Bill 2833 by Johnson relating the non-judicial foreclosure sale. of certain residential real property
• Hughes, relating to the operation and administration of and practi- related to proceedings in the judicial
• branch of state government to jurisprudence. 9 by Hughes relating to the Texas Supreme Court's rulemaking

Bills: SJR12 , SJR81 , SCR39 , SB22 , SB32 , SB241 , SB393 , SB414 , SB458 , SB464 , SB568 , SB583 , SB609 , SB660 , SB693 , SB731 , SB732 , SB746 , SB783 , SB785 , SB897 , SB993 , SB996 , SB1008 , SB1029 , SB1035 , SB1036 , SB1120 , SB1122 , SB1147 , SB1163 , SB1188 , SB1197 , SB1209 , SB1227 , SB1245 , SB1267 , SB1307 , SB1321 , SB1332 , SB1386 , SB1394 , SB1396 , SB1470 , SB1494 , SB1537 , SB1596 , SB1598 , SB1610 , SB1664 , SB1814 , SB1822 , SB1841 , SB1948 , SB2065 , SB2155 , SB2406 , SB2407 , SJR12 , SJR36 , SJR81 , SJR50 , SJR4 , SCR22 , SCR12 , SCR39 , SB765 , SB62 , SB666 , SB888 , SB687 , SB847 , SB1248 , SB504 , SB305 , SB296 , SB284 , SB241 , SB304 , SB1023 , SB204 , SB609 , SB670 , SB850 , SB854 , SB413 , SB1346 , SB1033 , SB1220 , SB1073 , SB810 , SB1539 , SB447 , SB1119 , SB1505 , SB1215 , SB1302 , SB583 , SB673 , SB681 , SB1172 , SB955 , SB957 , SB1120 , SB541 , SB266 , SB1415 , SB53 , SB1352 , SB785 , SB1450 , SB1502 , SB1566 , SB414 , SB1062 , SB711 , SB746 , SB1404 , SB1448 , SB507 , SB1026 , SB1349 , SB1355 , SB1433 , SB1434 , SB1596 , SB1403 , SB667 , SB1059 , SB1567 , SB310 , SB311 , SB505 , SB1209 , SB1210 , SB1470 , SB264 , SB1029 , SB1358 , SB1364 , SB1569 , SB1376 , SB1228 , SB519 , SB1350 , SB462 , SB827 , SB1585 , SB1396 , SB1484 , SB1273 , SB927 , SB1227 , SB1229 , SB1353 , SB1464 , SB1709 , SB1729 , SB1733 , SB1744 , SB1772 , SB1841 , SB1147 , SB1008 , SB2016 , SB1173 , SB1163 , SB996 , SB568 , SB1370 , SB1321 , SB1101 , SB860 , SB993 , SB693 , SB1610 , SB1537 , SB1332 , SB1307 , SB963 , SB493 , SB984 , SB619 , SB1122 , SB455 , SB522 , SB1057 , SB1239 , SB1254 , SB1255 , SB1259 , SB1341 , SB1664 , SB1877 , SB464 , SB1277 , SB32 , SB732 , SB660 , SB731 , SB921 , SB268 , SB1822 , SB1188 , SB1589 , SB397 , SB1058 , SB1036 , SB1267 , SB2112 , SB1930 , SB532 , SB1035 , SB2155 , SB508 , SB292 , SB291 , SB901 , SB1333 , SB1436 , SB1494 , SB964 , SB779 , SB1378 , SB2312 , SB1719 , SB1386 , SB287 , SB2143 , SB1245 , SB261 , SB1247 , SB1948 , SB2406 , SB2407 , SB1882 , SB1197 , SB1814 , SB618 , SB38 , SB393 , SB2065 , SB1371 , SB1394 , SB1365 , SB2243 , SB2226 , SB2039 , SB1919 , SB1895 , SB1598 , SB1493 , SB1810 , SB1791 , SB1706 , SB1644 , SB1238 , SB783 , SB458 , SB22 , SB651 , SB897 , SB1809 , SB1080 , SB745 , SB826 , SB989 , SB1320 , SB1437 , SB2320 , SB2289 , SB1171 , SB664 , SB1637 , SB2064 , SB868 , SJR40 , SJR27 , SCR38 , SCR37 , SB1079 , SB1243 , SB1504 , SB1851 , SB1879 , SB2237 , SB1257 , SB2034 , SB1522 , SB883 , SB249 , SB1318 , SB1151 , SB596 , SB1191 , SB226 , SB570 , SB870 , SB991 , SB60 , SB365 , SB1067 , SB1786 , SB326 , SB1401 , SB1592 , SB1728 , SB1265 , SB586 , SB529 , SB217 , SB209 , SB1923 , SB1559 , SB1839 , SB387 , SB1874 , SB1872 , SB1873 , SB1921 , SB1883 , SB1677 , SB95 , SB1620 , SB1838 , SB2024 , SB2429 , SB1999 , SB511 , SB2309 , SB2166 , SB871 , SB510 , SB33 , SB2420 , SB1860 , SB1541 , SB1316 , SB1314 , SB1313 , SB1426 , SB1398 , SB1869 , SB1750 , SB1871 , SB36 , SB855 , SB1233 , SB760 , SB2425 , SB2037 , SB1758 , SB1759 , SB2365 , SB1924 , SB762 , SB1271 , SB1818 , SB605 , SB1405 , SB1762 , SB1968 , SB1977 , SB2077 , SB2148 , SB2321 , SB1967 , SB1662 , SB1663 , SB2124 , SB2204

Keywords: parental rights, education, constitutional amendment, school choice, child education, tax exemption, ad valorem, tangible personal property, income production, border security, southern border, federal immigration policy, illegal immigration, cartels, transnational cartels, fentanyl, drug trafficking, human trafficking, Operation Lone Star, Texas border

Summary: The meeting primarily focused on educational reforms, particularly in special education funding. Notably, Senator Bettencourt laid out the transformative impacts of Senate Bill 568, which aims to lift a historical cap on special education funding that affected approximately 775,000 students. The discussions included plans for an intensity-based funding model that could ensure fair distribution of resources depending on individual needs, thereby enhancing educational support for diverse learning requirements. Senators acknowledged past failures in the special education framework, emphasizing the necessity of moving towards a system that is transparent and focused on delivering adequate services.

Transcript Highlights:

• branch. performance in the judicial branch.
• </c><00:07:16.000><c> branch</c> Several parts of the judicial branch Several parts of the judicial branch
• </c> judicial branch. judicial branch.
• The judicial branch is not.
• The judicial branch is not.

Bills: HF3901 , HF962 , HF4428 , HF4478 , HF1775

Committee: House Judiciary Finance and Civil Law

Keywords: foster care, ombudsperson, investigative powers, children's rights, complaint process, HF4428, Medical Assistance, Medicaid, community engagement, work requirement, work mandate, employment requirement, community service, 80 hours, half-time student, income threshold, federal minimum wage, eligibility verification, benefit suspension, benefit termination

Transcript Highlights:

• body for the judicial branch.
• body for the judicial branch.
• </c><00:04:30.720><c> branch</c> management of the entire judicial branch management of the entire judicial
• ><c> its</c> the judicial branch has strengthened its the judicial branch has strengthened its collaboration
• And that's where we're having the problem. judicial branch but providers attorneys judicial branch but

Committee: House Judiciary Finance and Civil Law

Transcript Highlights:

• The trial court level and the prospect of up to 7.95% reductions for other parts of the judicial branch
• The mission, as you heard, of the judicial branch is to resolve disputes and to interpret and apply the
• The mission as you heard of the judicial branch is to resolve disputes and to interpret and apply the
• the public funds allocated to the judicial branch.
• Through all of these changes and improvements, the judicial branch is demonstrating its ability to play

Summary: The California Legislature met in joint convention for the annual State of the Judiciary address, with judges and justices from across the state in attendance along with Governor Newsom and other statewide officials. The opening included prayer and the Pledge of Allegiance, followed by the formal introduction of Chief Justice Patricia Guerrero and the California Supreme Court justices. Speakers emphasized the importance of judicial independence, the courts’ role in protecting rights and democracy, and the value of collaboration between the legislative and judicial branches. Chief Justice Guerrero focused on the state of the judicial branch, beginning with budget pressures from prior cuts and noting partial restoration in the governor’s proposed budget, while urging continued stable funding for courts, court-appointed counsel, and judgeships in high-need counties. She highlighted the expansion and benefits of remote proceedings, ongoing judicial vacancies, workload growth, and efforts to improve data collection and case-weighting. She also discussed implementation of the CARE Act, the court interpreter workforce pilot, CASA and kin-first child welfare efforts, courthouse security and facilities projects, and the judiciary’s work on generative AI guardrails. A major portion of the address addressed the recent problems with the California bar exam and broader State Bar oversight. Guerrero said the court would pursue remedies for examinees harmed by the failures and would strengthen admissions oversight, including the role of the Committee of Bar Examiners. She also reiterated support for pro bono legal services and discussed immigration-related courthouse access, citing state laws limiting cooperation with federal immigration enforcement in courthouses. The convention concluded after remarks thanking the judiciary and Legislature, and the joint session adjourned without any recorded votes or formal legislative action.

Transcript Highlights:

• This year, the Judicial Branch plans to celebrate the unique role we play and the privilege we have to
• In recent years, it is true that the judicial branch... ...has received funding for about 50 different
• The judicial branch is laying a strong foundation with its model policies, training programs, and...
• I'm grateful for the vision, dedication, and hard work of the judicial branch leaders and Judicial Council
• branch leaders and Judicial Council members who have preceded me to build a strong and accountable judiciary

Transcript Highlights:

• </c> that we make in in the judicial branch. that we make in in the judicial branch.
• And so if we are to be advocates for the judicial branch, the judicial branch has to come and tell us
• </c><00:35:16.640><c> branch</c> concerned about the judicial branch concerned about the judicial branch
• c> M&amp;A</c> on the judicial branch website and M&amp;A on the judicial branch website and M&amp;A
• While there may be judicial branch.

Bills: HF3874 , HF3875 , HF3378

Committee: House Judiciary Finance and Civil Law

Transcript Highlights:

• The mission, as you heard, of the judicial branch is to resolve disputes and to interpret and apply the
• the public funds allocated to the judicial branch.
• And through our judicial branch facilities program, not as exciting, but also important, we seek to design
• Through all of these changes and improvements, the judicial branch is demonstrating its ability to play
• The judicial branch remains steadfast in its commitment to provide fair and impartial justice in accordance

Summary: The California Legislature met in Joint Convention for the annual State of the Judiciary, with remarks from legislative leaders, a prayer and Pledge of Allegiance, and the formal introduction of Chief Justice Patricia Guerrero and the California Supreme Court justices. Speakers emphasized the importance of judicial independence, the courts’ role in safeguarding democracy and equal justice, and the long history of the California Supreme Court. The convention also recognized statewide constitutional officers and judges from across California. Chief Justice Guerrero focused her address on the judicial branch’s budget needs and the impact of prior cuts, noting court closures, furloughs, and reduced services, while saying partial restoration in the governor’s proposed budget would help reduce hiring freezes and service disruptions. She urged continued “three-branch” collaboration and highlighted court operations and programs, including remote hearings, judicial vacancies, court-appointed counsel funding, workload and case-complexity data, CARE Act implementation, AI guardrails, interpreter workforce training, CASA programs, kin-first child placement efforts, court facility projects, and courthouse security improvements. She also discussed the State Bar and bar exam administration, calling for stronger oversight and remedies after recent exam failures, and addressed immigration-related court access issues, reaffirming that courts must remain open and accessible while respecting constitutional limits on state and federal authority. The convention concluded with thanks from legislative leaders and adjournment of the Joint Convention.

Transcript Highlights:

• The judicial branch was not at the negotiating table when leaders from the other two branches decided
• judicial judicial branch.<00:31:27.760><c> The</c><00:31:28.000><c> independent</c><00:31:28.640><c>
• judicial</c><00:31:29.200><c> branch</c> branch.
• The independent judicial branch branch.
• the judicial branch that underfunds the judicial branch.<00:32:53.360><c> We</c><00:32:53.600><c> funded

Transcript Highlights:

• </c><00:03:09.040><c> branch</c><00:03:09.440><c> budget</c> setting where a judicial branch budget setting
• </c><00:04:44.400><c> branch</c> and fines that the judicial branch and fines that the judicial branch
• </c> Um, you know, since 2010, the judicial Um, you know, since 2010, the judicial branch<00:08:25.599
• </c><00:09:29.600><c> branch</c> Senate bill required the judicial branch Senate bill required the judicial
• </c><00:42:12.480><c> Our</c> retain as the judicial branch. Our retain as the judicial branch.

Summary: The Interim Joint Budget Review Subcommittee on Justice and Judiciary met without a quorum and heard an update from the Administrative Office of the Courts on the judicial branch budget. AOC Director Zach Ramsey and budget director Carol Henderson outlined the branch’s current funding structure, noting that fiscal year 2026 general fund support is about 2.77% of the state general fund, below the National Center for State Courts’ typical 2% to 4% range. They emphasized Kentucky’s unusual responsibility for courthouse facilities, with the judicial branch directly involved in construction, maintenance, and operations across 229 facilities in all 120 counties. AOC said nearly 91% of its general fund is spent on personnel and other non-discretionary costs, and that the branch has long relied on agency revenue, restricted fund carryforwards, and vacancy credits to balance court operations. Members were told that Senate Bill 25 required a $34.5 million transfer into a reserve account, part of which was used to purchase the Chamberlain Avenue building in Frankfort. AOC reported that only $11.9 million remains in restricted funds, while it projects needing about $13.5 million to cover fiscal year 2026 obligations, not including roughly $9 million in flood-related remediation costs for Hardin and Franklin counties, much of which it expects to recover through insurance and FEMA. Looking ahead to the next biennium, AOC said it will seek full funding of court operations at $341 million annually, a $13.5 million increase to bring current services into the base appropriation rather than relying on reserves. It also previewed additional requests, including a 15% across-the-board pay parity plan for Kentucky Court of Justice personnel, replacement of declining master commissioner fee revenue tied to 141 deputy circuit court clerk positions, funding for technology subscription and case management system costs, JAV audiovisual system upgrades, AEDs and medical kits for courthouses, and other staffing and operational needs. Senator Funky Frommeyer asked whether the 15% salary proposal was included in the $13.5 million increase; AOC said it was not, and that it would be an additional request. No votes or formal actions were taken.

Transcript Highlights:

• branch, and he is the head of the judicial branch.
• branch, and he is the head of the judicial branch.
• branch, and he is the head of the judicial branch.
• branch, and he is the head of the judicial branch.
• Something you know that affects the judicial branch, and he is the head of the judicial branch.

Committee: House Judiciary

Bills: HR1041 , SB137 , SB1255 , SB1226 , SB1238 , SB1258 , SB1325 , SB1460 , SB1543 , SB1730 , SB1921 , SB1733 , SB1216 , SB1256 , SB1061 , SB1534 , SB1873 , SB1653 , SB540 , SB1948

Keywords: Oklahoma, House Resolution, HR1041, Nuclear Lifecycle Innovation Campus, Department of Energy, DOE, advanced nuclear, nuclear energy, small modular reactors, SMRs, microreactors, energy innovation, advanced energy, energy security, economic development, job creation, workforce training, research and development, nuclear supply chain, clean energy

Transcript Highlights:

• Already meeting with members of the executive branch and really just a great example of all of our communities

Bills: HR1041 , SB137 , SB1255 , SB1226 , SB1238 , SB1258 , SB1325 , SB1460 , SB1543 , SB1730 , SB1921 , SB1733 , SB1216 , SB1256 , SB1061 , SB1534 , SB1873 , SB1653 , SB540 , SB1948

Keywords: Oklahoma, House Resolution, HR1041, Nuclear Lifecycle Innovation Campus, Department of Energy, DOE, advanced nuclear, nuclear energy, small modular reactors, SMRs, microreactors, energy innovation, advanced energy, energy security, economic development, job creation, workforce training, research and development, nuclear supply chain, clean energy

Transcript Highlights:

• </c><00:13:41.480><c> of</c> judicial branch the third branch of judicial branch the third branch of
• ><c> Mr</c> the judicial branch right correct Mr the judicial branch right correct Mr chair<00:49:46.599
• </c><00:51:55.599><c> branch</c> goes to the judicial branch goes to the judicial branch uh<00:51:57.839
• <00:52:25.079><c> branch</c> judicial branch judicial branch um<00:52:27.480><c> I</c><00:52:27.680><
• </c><00:53:23.720><c> branch</c> they proposed for the judicial branch they proposed for the judicial

Committee: Senate Judiciary and Public Safety

Transcript Highlights:

• </c> the legislative session, our judicial the legislative session, our judicial branch<00:31:38.240>
• </c> failed to consult with the judicial failed to consult with the judicial branch<00:37:10.960><c>
• </c><00:58:50.079><c> the</c> judicial branch receive all of the judicial branch receive all of the current
• </c> do and not the employees of the judicial do and not the employees of the judicial branch.<00:58:
• judicial branch to charge a allows the judicial branch to charge a fee<01:00:14.160><c> to</c><01:00

Summary: The conference committee met late on Friday evening to discuss the Public Safety and Judiciary budget agreement, beginning with a brief exchange among members about concerns that the executive branch had been delaying the committee’s work by waiting to approve legislative decisions. Members emphasized that the legislature should retain its independence while still allowing normal collaboration with the governor’s office. The committee then moved through several outstanding policy items and adopted them without opposition, including the A38 amendment addressing data-sharing concerns involving disability-related information, a study of firefighting services by the state fire marshal, and an A46 amendment governing access to unredacted portable recording system data in collision investigations, with guardrails on disclosure and use. The committee next reviewed the spreadsheet and budget targets. Fiscal staff explained the judiciary side of the agreement, including funding for court operating costs, a one-time Justice Partner Access Program appropriation, forensic exam rate increases, guardian ad litem funding, public defense, human rights, the competency attainment board, the cannabis expungement board, and fee increases for civil filings and motions. On the public safety side, staff described the target as well as the discretionary items funded, including nonprofit security grants, BCA staffing changes, fire marshal initiatives, a 10-year arson statute of limitations, prosecutor training grants, legal representation for children, E911 funding for critical infrastructure, Philando Castile Training Fund support, corrections-related savings from the Stillwater phased closure and sentence-to-serve elimination, a mandatory minimums task force, a victims of crime account transfer, a decommissioning study, in-service use-of-force training, and extensions of several expiring appropriations. The committee also noted a correction to a spreadsheet label related to the Stillwater closure item. After the spreadsheet walkthrough, the committee took testimony from Chief Justice Natalie Hudson and State Court Administrator Jeff Shorban on behalf of the Minnesota Judicial Branch. Hudson thanked the committee for its work and said the agreement covers some unavoidable costs, including insurance, lease expenses, forensic examiner pay, and the new access system, but argued it does not adequately address the judiciary’s most urgent problem: staffing and judicial compensation. She said court employees are leaving for better-paying jobs, judicial salaries are frozen for two years, and applicant pools for judgeships have declined, especially in greater Minnesota. She also said the judicial branch was not meaningfully consulted on the budget target and urged lawmakers to recognize the courts as a constitutional obligation rather than a discretionary program.