Transcript Highlights:

• If awarded, the Commission would utilize grant funds to support community partners with existing civic
• The grant opportunity is from the U.S.
• The grant has no matching fund requirement.
• grants or direct outreach and engagement, communication and partnership costs, change management, and
• and Care Grant in Aid program.

Summary: The Emergency Board met on June 17, 2026, and approved a series of subcommittee recommendations, mostly on consent, related to federal grant applications, agency funding adjustments, and position authority. Early actions included approval of four federal grant applications from natural resources agencies, three public safety grant applications, a one-time increase for Judicial Department court security, retroactive approval for an AmeriCorps volunteer-generation grant, and a $7.5 million allocation to Southern Oregon University from a special appropriation for short-term financial stability. Members supporting the SOU item emphasized the university’s structural deficits, declining enrollment, and the need for a long-term higher education plan; several members voted no or raised concerns about sustainability, but the motion passed. The board also approved a federal apprenticeship expansion grant for the Higher Education Coordinating Commission, a school nutrition equipment grant for the Department of Education, and an Oregon Health Authority request tied to Medicaid community engagement requirements under H.R. 1. Public safety items included funding for Oregon Military Department readiness facilities, a report on the stalled juvenile justice information system modernization project with a follow-up viability report due in 2026, and a statewide evacuation planning tool for emergency management. The evacuation tool drew strong support as a wildfire preparedness measure, with members noting it could significantly reduce alert times and save lives. A major point of debate was the Department of Justice request to add 16 permanent positions and increase other funds limitation for antitrust enforcement. Supporters argued the federal government has pulled back and Oregon needs capacity to pursue active cases and protect consumers; opponents objected to the process, the size of the expansion, and the incentive structure tied to settlements and awards. Despite those concerns, the motion passed. The board also approved Water Resources Department requests for the Water Well Abandonment, Repair and Replacement program, an assistant water master position in Washington County, and federal funding for Lower Umatilla Basin groundwater data collection. The water master item prompted questions about county cost shifts, but staff said the position would remain externally funded and would not be filled without those resources.

Transcript Highlights:

• good outcomes for our communities.
• This program provides grants to... ...general fund for the dual enrollment opportunities grant program
• grants to mirror the funding levels of planning or startup grants.
• Yeah, and certainly for more suburban, urban communities where there are many community college options
• I'm wondering, in the rural communities where they're so far away from maybe their nearest community

Summary: The committee heard an update on the administration’s Career Education Master Plan and the new California Education Interagency Council. Administration and agency staff described efforts to better connect K-12, higher education, workforce, and data systems, including the California Cradle to Career Data System, e-Transcript California, and a proposed career passport. They emphasized regional coordination with workforce boards and community colleges, and said the new council’s immediate tasks are to hold its first meeting by the end of June, enter into a data-sharing MOU, and complete a strategic plan by the end of November. Members asked about the council’s authority, reporting requirements, and how it would relate to the broader Master Plan for Higher Education; staff said the council will make recommendations but does not have implementation authority. The committee then took up the Governor’s proposed $100 million one-time expansion of dual enrollment grants and related changes to instructional minute requirements. Finance and the Department of Education said the proposal would support middle college, early college, and CCAP programs, add technical assistance, prioritize high-need LEAs, and reduce the minimum instructional day for certain dual enrollment students from 240 to 180 minutes to ease scheduling barriers. The Chancellor’s Office strongly supported the investment, citing access, acceleration, and equity benefits, while the LAO recommended rejecting the funding, arguing the state already provides ongoing support and that the proposal does not address major barriers. Members raised questions about adult learners, A-G alignment, reporting on outcomes and expenditures, rural access, transportation, staffing, and whether the funding would create lasting program capacity. The item was left open after discussion. The committee also considered trailer bill language to align the definition of long-term English learners across data systems. Finance and CDE said the change would simplify identification by defining LTELs as students who have not attained English proficiency within seven years and RTELs as students not proficient within six years, matching the dashboard and research-based timelines. CDE said the current mismatch between dashboard and assessment definitions creates confusion and delays, while some members and advocates worried the change could reduce earlier intervention or should be handled through policy committees rather than the budget process. The committee voted to reject the proposal and refer it to policy, though the administration said it still supports the budget language. Finally, the committee heard a proposal to extend the Supporting Inclusive Practices project by one year, through June 30, 2027. CDE said the project is promising but raised concerns about the contract structure and fiscal management, while Marysville Joint Unified School District testified that SIP had helped expand inclusive preschool and district-wide practices and reduce reliance on more restrictive placements. Members questioned why funds had not been fully encumbered and whether the remaining money should be redirected to areas with greater implementation need. The item was discussed but no final action was described in the excerpt.

Transcript Highlights:

• the grant.
• It's valuable to our communities. It protects us from disease. It's valuable to our communities.
• to the community.
• Some of the highlights, even for the disparities grant, was about rural communities as well.
• They worked with communities. They hired people from the community, actually. It was great to see.

Summary: The subcommittee held an oversight hearing on federal actions affecting California’s public health and family planning systems, focusing first on the freeze to Title X family planning funds and then on broader CDC/public health grant terminations. Chair and members described the cuts as abrupt, harmful, and likely to create major gaps in disease surveillance, vaccination, contraception, STI testing, and other preventive services, while also criticizing the federal administration’s explanation that the actions were tied to DEI or civil-rights compliance. The chair thanked Attorney General Bonta for legal action and said the hearing was intended to document the real-world impacts and inform state budget responses. Witnesses from Essential Access Health, Planned Parenthood Affiliates of California, a Central Coast clinic, and other providers said California’s Title X network serves more than half a million low-income patients annually and relies on the funds for staffing, outreach, training, mobile and school-based clinics, and confidential care. They warned that the freeze has already forced reserve spending, delayed services, and could lead to layoffs, reduced hours, longer waits, and fewer appointments, especially for sexual and reproductive health care. Public comment included support for a proposed state backfill of Title X losses, with advocates emphasizing impacts on low-income, LGBTQ+, and communities of color. On the public health side, CDPH, county health officials, and local health officers testified that the CDC’s rescission of $11.4 billion in grants would affect California by an estimated $840 million and threaten lab capacity, immunization programs, health disparities work, and data systems such as CalConnect and vaccine registries. Sacramento County and others described how the grants supported outbreak response, sequencing, community vaccination clinics, and equity-focused partnerships, and said terminations had already led to canceled appointments, stopped contracts, and layoffs. Several speakers urged the Legislature to preserve and expand state “future of public health” funding and to backfill federal losses, while public commenters from HIV, immunization, labor, and county organizations echoed concerns about workforce losses and worsening health outcomes.

Transcript Highlights:

• Federal funds include principal forgiveness grants for disadvantaged communities and green infrastructure
• The way that we make the decisions around these grant dollars is really individualized to the community
• Some communities do end up waiting until the grant dollars become available.
• I'll just use my community for example: a $3 million request for a grant for radium in the water.
• Radium in the water is bad, but if my community was in Greater Minnesota, it would have got a grant.

Committee: House Capital Investment

Transcript Highlights:

• </c> development public infrastructure grant development public infrastructure grant program<00:02:56.480
• </c> exceed $5 million with the state Grant exceed $5 million with the state Grant of<00:04:24.560><c
• We are the recipients as well of this BBPI grant, and we were also recipients of a federal ADA grant
• </c><00:08:02.879><c> in</c> um it really allows small communities in um it really allows small communities
• </c> done that they need in their communities done that they need in their communities to<00:08:08.479

Transcript Highlights:

• County, we strongly oppose the budget cuts to the CBAH Community Advocacy Grants.
• County, we strongly oppose the budget cuts to the CBAH Community Advocacy Grants.
• I’m here to oppose Item 4560, which would eliminate funding for community advocacy grants.
• I’m here to oppose Item 4560, which would eliminate funding for community advocacy grants.
• I oppose the elimination of the community advocacy grants.

Summary: The Assembly Budget Subcommittee on Health held a May Revision hearing covering several health-related budget proposals and broader concerns about the state’s budget structure. The Chair opened by praising some May Revision changes, such as added health IT funding, county administration support tied to Medi-Cal changes, a delay in Medi-Cal cuts for some lawfully present immigrants, and additional support for Covered California subsidies, while criticizing proposed increases in Medi-Cal premiums, changes to senior eligibility, the lack of a Medi-Cal dental solution, and other reductions affecting counties, mobile crisis units, workforce incentives, and physician shortages. The Legislative Analyst’s Office said the state’s budget condition remains weak despite progress on the structural deficit, and the Department of Finance said the May Revision uses a mix of reductions, reforms, revenue proposals, and fund shifts to cut out-year deficits. The committee first heard Department of State Hospitals proposals, including adjustments to county bed billing authority, contract exemption language for online clinical/pharmacy subscriptions, reversion of unspent funds, a revised Metro Central Utility Plant replacement project, electronic health record implementation, and workforce development funded partly through Behavioral Health Services Act resources. DSH also described savings and realignments in incompetent-to-stand-trial and conditional release programs, including extending the independent placement panel program and shifting funds to support additional bed capacity and a mental health rehab center. Members asked about the use of BHSA funds for workforce programs, and the department said the proposal would replace General Fund support with BHSA reimbursements. The Emergency Medical Services Authority proposed funding for statewide behavioral health crisis response guidance and for enterprise system development, and the Department of Managed Health Care proposed modernization of its complaint system and claims-settlement data system to improve oversight and comply with AB 3275. The largest discussion centered on the administration’s BHSA spending plan under Proposition 1, including state-directed prevention, workforce, and other uses, plus General Fund offsets for existing programs. The LAO questioned whether some proposed offsets fit Proposition 1’s non-supplant and eligible-use requirements, while the administration argued the uses were consistent with the measure and that the state-directed share can be adjusted annually. The Commission for Behavioral Health’s proposals drew the most public and member concern. The administration proposed cutting the commission’s Innovation Partnership Fund from $20 million to $10 million and reducing the Community Advocacy Program by $6.7 million, while redirecting BHSA dollars to other state purposes and direct services. Commissioners, advocates, and several members argued the cuts would weaken community voice, reduce support for underserved populations, and disrupt grants already in process; they also objected to using BHSA funds to backfill General Fund commitments. Public commenters, including youth, disability, behavioral health, LGBTQ, tribal, veteran, immigrant, and community-based organization representatives, overwhelmingly opposed the cuts and urged preservation of prevention, advocacy, mobile crisis, and innovation funding. No votes or final actions were taken during the hearing.

Transcript Highlights:

• We are now starting to lend to land grants and some other smaller communities that don't have access
• So, there are large communities and small communities that make up that portfolio.
• So we do loan grants.
• We've launched a grant application to support rural communities in all of our regions across the state
• The Outdoor Recreation and Trails Plus grant is also another awesome opportunity for our rural communities

Committee: House House Rural Development, Land Grants And Cultural Affairs

Transcript Highlights:

• I don't think that the grant that they applied for, the grant that they applied for...
• grant.
• grant?
• We had email communication.
• “I understand the grant itself.” “The grant itself, which you were a part of.”

Transcript Highlights:

• grant?
• Okay, $600 million in grants.
• We had email communication.
• I understand the grant itself. The grant itself, which you were a part of.
• I understand the grant itself.

Summary: The follow-up informational hearing focused on the State Library’s oversight of the statewide Imagination Library and the Strong Reader Partnership (SRP), including how the original $68.2 million state investment was spent, why funds were not redirected sooner to the Dollywood Foundation, and whether spending complied with AB 157 and later SB 105. Committee members repeatedly raised concerns that SRP and the State Library had been slow to provide documents, that quarterly reporting and other contract requirements were not met on time, and that the State Library did not escalate issues earlier. State Librarian Greg Lucas said the library sent one demand letter, relied on counsel’s view that SRP could continue spending its $4.8 million so long as it furthered the program, and later redirected about $55 million to the Dollywood Foundation after paperwork was submitted. He also acknowledged the library should have shared SRP’s final report with the committee sooner and said the materials eventually received appeared satisfactory, though the chair and Senator Grove remained concerned that there was still no clear accounting of books delivered by SRP. A major portion of the hearing examined SRP’s expenditures and vendor contracts, including Shipyard for marketing and web services, SAGE Strategies for management consulting, Lotus Financial Solutions and other financial vendors, and United Way California Capital Region for a small marketing grant. Committee members questioned whether some spending, especially Changecraft’s work during the AB 157 period, amounted to lobbying or attempts to influence legislation, which the grant agreement prohibited. SRP representatives said the work was communications and stakeholder outreach, not lobbying, and that invoices reflected the board’s oversight and the nonprofit’s startup and closeout phases. They also said some work continued during the rescission and closeout period to unwind contracts and return funds, and that any reporting delays were due to transition, lack of a reporting mechanism from the State Library, and the need to collect records after vendors were canceled. Members of SRP said the nonprofit was created to build the infrastructure for a self-sustaining statewide program, expand local partnerships, and support multilingual outreach in underserved counties. They described a working board that met regularly, selected vendors collectively, and used multiple financial and administrative contractors to maintain checks and balances. However, committee members pressed them on the lack of detailed invoices, the absence of clear metrics showing how many books SRP actually delivered, and the limited apparent return on spending such as the $581,708 Shipyard contract, the $125,000 website work, and the $5,000 United Way grant. No formal vote or legislative action was taken during the hearing; it was an oversight session aimed at obtaining explanations and additional documentation.

Transcript Highlights:

• </c><00:05:01.880><c> we</c> by fully funding the state Grant we by fully funding the state Grant we
• </c><00:07:02.240><c> on</c> thanks to the Minnesota state Grant on thanks to the Minnesota state Grant
• </c> Minnesota state Grant the grant has kept Minnesota state Grant the grant has kept my<00:07:12.759
• </c> with the Foster Independence Grant with the Foster Independence Grant without<00:15:27.519><c> fig
• </c> competitive you invest in communities competitive you invest in communities that<00:31:10.600><c

Committee: Senate Higher Education

Transcript Highlights:

• On line 326 is a grant program for emergency grants for community identity and heritage emergency grants
• ><c> for</c><00:20:33.760><c> community</c> for emergency grants for community for emergency grants for
• </c><00:20:35.919><c> grants.
• </c> identity and heritage emergency grants. identity and heritage emergency grants.
• </c> the grant um are uh woman run as well. the grant um are uh woman run as well.

Committee: Senate Finance

Transcript Highlights:

• Tens of thousands more community college students are receiving Cal Grants as a result.
• Those funds should stay with the California Community Colleges in the form of a block grant that could
• So we are serving 93 California community college campuses today. 80 are grant funded, 13 were not grant
• . growth at a 5% and the California Community College entitlement Cal grants projected at a growth at
• The High School Entitlement Cal Grant Award and the Community College Entitlement Award.

Transcript Highlights:

• and Natural Resource Trust Fund community grant program.
• This is for the community grants.
• This is for the community<00:36:09.040><c> grants.
• This would put the uh community grants.
• </c> community grants amendment out there. community grants amendment out there.

Bills: HF3426 , HF3428

Committee: House Environment and Natural Resources Finance and Policy

Transcript Highlights:

• So I was asked to touch on the Community Services Block Grant, not to be confused with the Community
• "Not to be confused with the Community Development Block Grant.
• So the $770 million block grant, that's for all the community action agencies. We get $3 million.
• So these additional community action programs that you listed here, are those within the block grant
• Our data also shows that we are expending North Dakota homeless grant dollars in rural communities.

Committee: Joint Human Services

Summary: The Human Services Committee met in interim session and first approved the previous meeting minutes before receiving a series of presentations on homelessness and housing stability. Jennifer Henderson of the North Dakota Housing Finance Agency updated members on the new Interagency Council on Homelessness, describing its executive-order mandate to review resources, gather input from stakeholders, identify gaps, and develop recommendations. She said the council’s first work is building a statewide program matrix of existing homeless services and funding sources, with attention to youth, tribal communities, and other vulnerable populations. Members raised concerns about youth homelessness, homeless veterans, and how the council will stay focused on a practical framework rather than getting lost in details. The committee also discussed possible connections to the rural health transformation grant and agreed to continue the topic later in the spring. Beth Olson of Presentation Partners in Housing described the organization’s housing-first model in Cass County and Clay County, including homeless prevention/diversion, housing navigation, and Cooper House, a 42-unit permanent supportive housing building in Fargo. She said the organization focuses on people with long-term and chronic homelessness, many with mental health, addiction, health, domestic violence, and Indigenous identity-related barriers, and reported strong outcomes: 85 of 86 people housed in 2025, 91% still housed after one year, and major reductions in emergency room use, ambulance rides, jail stays, detox days, and shelter use. She also explained that state funding has grown from a small share of the budget to about $1.1 million in state-connected funding for fiscal 2026, largely through contracts tied to supportive services. Members asked about vouchers, rent contributions at Cooper House, length of stay, and whether similar projects could be expanded elsewhere. Andrea Olson of the Community Action Partnership of North Dakota outlined statewide homeless and housing-related services delivered through six community action agencies in all 53 counties. She explained the Community Services Block Grant structure, said housing was identified as the top need in the most recent statewide needs assessment, and described programs including Supportive Services for Veteran Families, North Dakota Homeless Grant services, and Home ARP supportive services. She emphasized that the end of North Dakota Rent Help has increased pressure on the system, that the current $2 million annual homeless grant is far smaller than prior rent-help assistance, and that community action is using case management and financial assistance to move households toward self-sufficiency. Members asked about funding formulas, rural service delivery, and coordination with Presentation Partners to avoid duplication. YouthWorks then began a presentation on youth homelessness, describing services for ages 12 to 24, the special needs of youth and former foster youth, and the organization’s use of federal and state funds to support transitional housing, emergency shelter, maternity housing, and diversion services.

Transcript Highlights:

• Okay, issue number two is a learning recovery block grant.
• funds are prioritized for our disadvantaged communities?
• Communities.
• 20% in the supplemental grant below that.
• So coming from a lower-income community, I still reside in that community.

Summary: The committee heard presentations on the Governor’s education budget proposals for the Local Control Funding Formula (LCFF), Learning Recovery Block Grant, and Expanded Learning Opportunities Program (ELOP), followed by testimony from State Board of Education President Linda Darling-Hammond. On LCFF, Finance outlined the proposed 2.43% COLA, repayment of prior deferrals, and a trailer bill penalty for LEAs that fail to adopt Local Control Accountability Plans on time. The LAO said its COLA estimate was slightly lower and raised concerns that the Governor’s proposed TK staffing ratio increase may be more costly than estimated. Members also discussed whether the current COLA formula should better reflect California-specific or district staffing costs, and whether TK should be more clearly separated from the K-3 grade span adjustment to avoid larger K-3 class sizes. The chair asked staff to work with the LAO on both the TK/K-3 issue and alternative COLA calculations. For the Learning Recovery Block Grant, Finance proposed restoring the first of three delayed payments, $378.6 million one-time Proposition 98 General Fund, while the LAO recommended adopting the proposal but extending the expenditure deadline by at least a year. The LAO reported that districts had spent $1.6 billion of the $6.8 billion received through 2023-24 and said most districts were only now shifting from federal COVID relief to block grant spending. Members questioned whether the large state and federal investments were improving outcomes, citing declining reading and math trends, while Finance and the State Board president pointed to some signs of improvement, especially in math, attendance, and gains for some student groups. Darling-Hammond emphasized that student needs have grown, that recovery spending has gone to devices, ventilation, staffing, tutoring, summer school, and community schools, and that targeted interventions appear to be helping some districts recover faster than others. On ELOP, Finance proposed adding $435 million to expand universal access by lowering the Tier 1 threshold from 75% to 55% unduplicated pupils, bringing ongoing funding to $4.4 billion. The LAO said the estimate was reasonable but recommended delaying implementation for a year, aligning ELOP with ASES to reduce overlap, moving toward funding based on participation rather than enrollment, and considering a fixed Tier 2 rate. Members and witnesses discussed staffing challenges, the use of funds for students with disabilities, and uncertainty in Tier 2 funding caused by unspent dollars and opt-outs. Darling-Hammond supported ELOP as part of California’s broader after-school and summer learning strategy, said most districts are now offering full-day TK and expanded learning, and urged the state to reduce fragmentation across categorical programs and build more unified systems for funding, reporting, and support.

Transcript Highlights:

• </c><00:12:10.839><c> leadership</c> work through the community leadership work through the community
• </c> connecting with students writing grants connecting with students writing grants and<00:13:55.839
• </c> directors that the current Grant directors that the current Grant timetable<00:14:44.720><c> has
• </c><00:18:39.400><c> appropriation</c> UMB um emergency grants appropriation UMB um emergency grants
• program came in I applied for the grant program came in I applied for the grant<00:26:52.159><c> to<

Committee: Senate Higher Education

Transcript Highlights:

• non-competitive grants and up to 5% of grant funds for competitive grants to ensure stable and adequate
• non-competitive grants and up to 5% of grant funds for competitive grants to ensure stable and adequate
• non-competitive grants and up to 5% of grant funds for competitive grants to ensure stable and adequate
• funds for competitive grants to Grant funds for competitive grants to ensure<00:02:59.480><c> stable
• 00:53:18.119><c> over</c> Grant administration fee new grants over Grant administration fee new grants

Committee: Senate Judiciary and Public Safety

Transcript Highlights:

• This particular grant was developed through bipartisan support in Congress through the Safer Communities
• </c> two of these federal grants. two of these federal grants.
• Program grants, or OSEP grants.
• These grants are office federal grants.
• </c> generations of our communities. generations of our communities.

Transcript Highlights:

• In administering grants and delivering our programming, we work to truly embrace all Minnesota communities
• First, we seek to ensure that all communities are aware of our grant opportunities.
• </c> did receive a grant. did receive a grant.
• that grant opportunity and very clearly there is a need in the community under that grant line.
• that grant opportunity and very clearly there is a need in the community under that grant line.

Bills: HF4148

Committee: House Legacy Finance

Transcript Highlights:

• So, for example, commune...
• We have a grants management system that we are using now for the incentive grants that is already in
• Our Ag Incentive Grant continues.
• Secondary Programs, CTE Incentive Grant, and the Agricultural CTE Grant and the California Partnership
• Would it be the community college?