Transcript Highlights:

• Representative Schultz said that if the work is done and periodic data matching is being done, it saves
• He said that if the work is done and periodic data matching is being done, it saves the state tens of
• Representative No said periodic data matching saves the state tens of millions of dollars on an annual
• That meant the next data matching.
• </c><00:21:44.159><c> Speaker,</c> data matching. Thank you, Mr. Speaker, data matching.

Transcript Highlights:

• So we saved $230 per enrollment, which this year equates to about $15 million in savings to the state
• That was a great opportunity for them, saves the family money, saves them money, and gets them ahead
• And so that data then can also match what the school has at their side.
• And so that data then can also match what the school has at their side.
• also match what the school has at their side.

Committee: House Education

Transcript Highlights:

• The level of match ranges based on the authorizing legislation, so it can be as little as no match or
• about require match um the level<00:20:57.440><c> of</c><00:20:57.640><c> match</c><00:20:58.320><c>
• significant amount of match um State match<00:21:21.320><c> funds</c><00:21:21.600><c> that</c><00:21
• :21.720><c> were</c><00:21:21.880><c> appropriated</c> match funds that were appropriated match funds
• So the first match fund is the IIJA discretionary match fund.

Committee: Senate Capital Investment

Transcript Highlights:

• Additionally, the intent of this funding was to match with FEMA grants.
• Additionally, the intent of this funding was to match with FEMA grants.
• And the reality is that one home may not save an entire community.
• lives, saving structures, but also...
• It's not just about saving lives, saving structures, but ultimately, this is not going to get better.

Transcript Highlights:

• The matching process is you've got to match with a residency program to become a family practitioner,
• They match, they get their training, and they stay here.
• went through the process and she did get matched.
• Almost all of those residents, I mean, almost 100% do match.
• the best, and the others that don't get matched aren't good physicians.

Summary: The committee first heard Senate Bill 211, which would appropriate $5 million for the Las Vegas Rodriguez Park. Senator Campos said the money would help continue upgrades to baseball, softball, and little league fields and address fencing, flooding, and other park improvements as part of a larger regional park plan. There was no public opposition, and the bill received a unanimous do pass recommendation, 7-0. The committee then took up Senate Bill 131, a broad housing and zoning reform measure sponsored by Senator Maestas. The bill would allow more housing types by right, including accessory dwelling units, duplexes, townhomes, apartments in commercial zones, small-scale commercial uses in neighborhoods, and would eliminate minimum parking mandates; an amendment to remove height restrictions was adopted unanimously. Supporters, including Pew, housing advocates, chambers of commerce, builders, and some local officials, argued the bill would increase supply, lower costs, and modernize outdated zoning. Opponents, including the Realtors, Municipal League, neighborhood representatives, and several senators, argued it would preempt local control, ignore community differences, and could create infrastructure and neighborhood impacts. After extended debate, the committee tabled SB 131 by a recorded vote. Senate Bill 183 was next, proposing a feasibility study for a regional urgent care or emergency facility in Torrance County. The sponsor and local officials described long ambulance transports, heavy use of I-40, and the need for quicker access to care for rural residents and travelers. The bill drew support from a former hospital administrator and no opposition, and it passed 9-1. The committee then considered Senate Bill 222, which would appropriate $20 million for physician residency programs outside the federal system to help retain doctors in New Mexico. The sponsor and supporters said the state loses many medical graduates because of limited residency slots, while one witness urged accountability for large hospital systems. Some senators questioned the premise and feasibility, but the bill advanced on a 6-4 do pass vote to Finance.

Transcript Highlights:

• The department would bill the Division of Medicaid for a 50% federal match for these positions and any
• in selling the first building, and then second... ...what would be the immediate savings in selling
• And there would certainly be some savings there as you're reducing the utility draw and consolidating
• We kind of matched the revenue with the expenses, but that was taking those utility expenses off the
• The state's match for this project is 25%.

Summary: The committee heard budget presentations for the Department of Administration and the Permanent Building Fund. For Administration, analysts reviewed the agency’s divisions, staffing, dedicated-fund structure, recent budget growth, and the governor’s and JFAC’s recommended changes. The department requested shifts of utility costs from the general fund to dedicated funds, three new positions and funding for Medicaid procurement and contract management, transfers of some positions between divisions, and one-time IT replacement funding. Members also discussed office-space utilization, vacant buildings and land at Chinden and elsewhere, and the department’s efforts to consolidate space and reduce general fund reliance. Director Bailey said the department has reduced or repurposed positions, closed duplicate printing operations, is exploring digital workflows and AI tools, and is trying to move toward a fully dedicated-fund model. He also explained the decision to remove GLP-1 weight-loss coverage from the state health plan due to rapidly rising costs, while noting diabetes coverage remains in place. Committee members questioned the need for higher-level procurement staff for Medicaid contracts, the role of Deloitte and the Department of Health and Welfare in the process, and the status of the MMIS procurement, which Bailey said is currently stayed by the courts after a legal challenge from the second-place vendor. He said the delay will affect MMIS implementation and, in turn, the timing of the broader managed care rollout. Members also asked about vacant state office space, the possible sale of older buildings, and whether agencies such as ITD and Health and Welfare could be moved into state-owned space to reduce lease costs. Bailey said the department is actively working on those facility-planning questions and that agencies at Chinden are paying rent for occupied space. The committee then reviewed the Permanent Building Fund budget, which finances state construction, repairs, and deferred maintenance through dedicated revenue sources and interest earnings. Analysts highlighted the fund’s multi-year project structure, the large deferred maintenance program funded in prior years, and a proposed one-time transfer of $33.75 million in canceled capital project balances to the general fund. They also described a possible redirection of fiscal year 2027 interest earnings to the general fund and a recommended new capital project for an Idaho National Guard readiness center. Administrator Barard reported that the Division of Public Works is managing 595 active projects, with most FY 2025 projects under construction, in design, or complete, and said the division continues to face labor shortages and rising construction costs. Members asked about canceled projects, including the North Idaho reentry center, the Carnegie Library purchase, the ISU pedestrian crossing, the Idaho State Police Lewiston facility, and other projects; staff said some are unlikely to return soon, while others may come back once land or other prerequisites are secured. The committee concluded the hearing and announced it would meet the next day for the Department of Parks and Recreation and the Office of the State Public Defender.

Transcript Highlights:

• And I truly believe that AB 988 has already saved lives, but it will continue to save lives.
• I truly believe that AB 988 has already saved lives, but it would continue to save lives.
• The reliance is life-saving.
• But when that current match goes away, this would be another avenue to get the match.
• Because for all those lives saved, you save a lot of other costs.

Transcript Highlights:

• </c> delivers cost savings to rateayers. delivers cost savings to rateayers.
• grant or piloting an energy uh matching grant or piloting an energy uh and<00:15:50.399><c> cost-saving
• </c> communities. they'll be able to save communities. they'll be able to save some<00:43:34.800><c>
• Towns lose the savings that contracts.
• Um, and in terms of saving uh, &gt;&gt; Yeah.

Committee: Senate Energy and Natural Resources

Transcript Highlights:

• Is there federal matching?
• local match be?
• match be?
• Now, on the local match...
• for the local match?

Transcript Highlights:

• One of those data sources is the PARIS match, the Public Assistance Reporting Information System.
• So, the information in that match is sometimes up to six months old.
• One of those data sources is the PARIS match, the Public Assistance Reporting Information System.
• So, the information in that match is sometimes up to six months old.
• Ultimately may not save us any money.

Summary: The committee met with a quorum to consider the Senate Committee Substitute for House Bill 2, a major Medicaid bill. Members first adopted the substitute and then adopted Amendment 9770. The bill was described as a lengthy rewrite aimed at aligning Kentucky Medicaid policy with federal requirements under HR 1, while also preserving program integrity and addressing due process concerns. Senators and staff repeatedly emphasized that the measure was the product of extensive meetings with providers, associations, and work groups. The sponsor’s section-by-section summary highlighted several key changes: delaying and reducing cost-sharing requirements; pushing eligibility redetermination deadlines to the federal date; restoring some flexibility for hardship waivers; allowing self-attestation as a last resort; modifying MCO audit provisions; clarifying non-emergency medical transport GPS costs; expanding waiver attestation authority to nurse practitioners and licensed psychologists; adding qualified aliens to waiver eligibility to comply with federal law; requiring Medicaid data sharing with the oversight board; limiting changes to Medicaid benefits without General Assembly authorization; narrowing the prescription drug exclusion to drugs prescribed primarily for weight loss; and delaying the dental ASO transition until 2029. The substitute also deleted a proposed auditor review requirement and retained an emergency clause. Committee discussion focused heavily on the policy and fiscal implications of the cost-sharing and recertification provisions. Senators raised concerns about whether the co-pays would be effective or simply shift costs to providers, whether the recertification process would burden the Cabinet and cause eligible people to lose coverage, and how the bill would affect people transitioning from Medicaid into work. Supporters said the lower cost-sharing amounts were intended to encourage appropriate use of care, protect providers, and comply with federal law, and they noted that the Medicaid Oversight and Advisory Board would help shape future changes. A public witness, Maggie Chisholm, gave emotional testimony about her daughter’s experience with a Medicaid waiver and argued that policy delays and administrative disconnects can harm vulnerable families. No final vote on the bill itself was recorded in the excerpt, but the substitute and amendment were adopted and testimony continued.

Transcript Highlights:

• The fees need to match up with what the actual costs of enforcement and administration are.
• The excellent staff report and the excellent report from DCA and the Bureau didn't cover matching up
• All of those match very closely with workload analyses we did in late 2025, so we’re happy to provide
• Because those should generally, the fee for a service should generally match what we are charging for
• Because those should generally, the fee for a service should generally match what we are charging for

Summary: The joint Sunset Review Oversight Hearing focused on the Bureau for Private Postsecondary Education (BPPE) and its reauthorization, operations, enforcement, fiscal condition, and student protections. Committee leaders and DCA officials praised the Bureau’s recent improvements in data systems, licensing, inspections, and enforcement, while noting the Bureau’s role has become more important as federal higher education oversight weakens. Bureau Chief Deborah Cochran said the agency has met its inspection mandate for the first time since the law was enacted, increased citations and disciplinary actions, reduced pending complaints, and used data tools to identify risk and monitor institutions more effectively. A major portion of the hearing centered on student harm, especially school closures, transcript access, predatory recruiting, and the Student Tuition Recovery Fund (STRF). Members asked how the Bureau protects students when schools close, whether bad actors can reopen under new entities, and whether enforcement tools are strong enough. Cochran said the Bureau can cite, fine, place schools on probation, revoke licenses, and order refunds, but it is seeking new authority to deny approval to operators who previously closed schools improperly or failed to refund students. She also said the Bureau is tracking ownership data and is concerned about institutions targeting immigrant and visa students. On STRF, Cochran explained that the fund is currently healthy, assessments are at zero because the balance is above the statutory target, and the Bureau paid about 1,100 claims totaling roughly $17 million over the last four years. Several members questioned the fairness of the assessment structure and discussed alternatives such as surety bonds, but the Bureau said STRF is working well and no change is needed at this time. Fee increases and the Bureau’s structural deficit were another major topic. Cochran said the Bureau reduced costs by eliminating positions, streamlining inspections, improving data analysis, and shifting some student-relief costs to STRF, but that legislative action is still needed to address the deficit. She said the proposed fees were based on workload analyses and that application fees generally match service costs, while annual fees are designed to cover most of the Bureau’s revenue needs. Some members and stakeholders criticized the proposed increases as too high, especially for out-of-state registration and campus fees, while others argued the Bureau needs sufficient resources to regulate effectively. Public commenters from private schools, Northeastern University, San Joaquin Valley College/Carrington College, and TICAS generally supported the Bureau’s mission and reauthorization, but urged changes such as risk-based oversight, better transcript protections, stronger limits on repeated provisional approvals, and more targeted fee and STRF reforms. No votes were taken, and the hearing ended with no formal action beyond discussion and receipt of testimony.

Transcript Highlights:

• The fees need to match up with what the actual costs of enforcement and administration are.
• The excellent staff report and the excellent report from DCA and the Bureau didn't cover is matching
• All of those match very closely with workload analyses we did in late 2025, so we're happy to provide
• But again, that matches the workload associated with that application and going through the monitoring
• Because the fee for a service should generally match what we are charging for that service.

Transcript Highlights:

• And we match dollar for dollar. Or in some cases, they provide more than 50% of the money.
• And we match dollar for dollar. Or some cases, they provide more than 50% of the money.
• If we were to do matching grants down there, that's going to take a significant block of money.
• Those monies go out the door to match federal monies.
• Jessup: what's the ROI on renting this land versus water being saved?

Summary: The committee first reviewed the Department of Water Resources budget. Analysts and Director Matthew Weaver explained the agency’s staffing, continuously appropriated funds, and the effect of ARPA and other one-time infrastructure dollars on the budget. Members asked about efforts to stabilize the Snake River Plain aquifer, the impact of budget holdbacks, groundwater monitoring, and the status of major recharge and conversion projects. Weaver and Water Resource Board Chairman Jeff Raybould said the state is working to reduce groundwater pumping, expand recharge, and build infrastructure to reach a long-term managed recharge goal of 350,000 acre-feet annually, with current recharge averaging about 251,000 acre-feet and capacity potentially exceeding 500,000 acre-feet in good water years. They also discussed project delays caused by permitting, federal land access, and coordination with multiple landowners, and said the $30 million infrastructure appropriation was fully obligated and largely spent. The committee also discussed water projects in other basins, including the Palouse Basin, Mountain Home, Elmore County, and the Bear River. Raybould said the board is considering a Bear River study to identify storage, recharge, and irrigation opportunities under the Bear River compact, and estimated that some future projects, such as a Moscow-area pump station and pipeline, could be very expensive. Members raised concerns about data centers, water quality in the Snake River Plain aquifer, and the role of private and local matching funds in water infrastructure. Weaver said data center water use is a public-interest issue that depends on scale and location, and that groundwater contamination issues are generally handled by the Department of Environmental Quality. The committee then heard the Soil and Water Conservation Commission presentation, which focused on the proposed merger/affiliation with the Department of Water Resources and on funding for the Conservation Reserve Enhancement Program (CREP). Weaver, serving as interim administrator, said a stakeholder review recommended moving the commission’s affiliation from Agriculture to Water Resources while preserving its current duties, nonregulatory mission, and resources. He said related legislation and a concurrent resolution would support that transition and allow time for further code review and a combined budget in 2027. Analysts also explained a supplemental and FY 2027 enhancement for CREP funding, noting that rising land values increased the state match needed for enrolled acres. Weaver said CREP can help reduce groundwater pumping, that about 11,000 of the 50,000-acre statewide cap are currently enrolled, and that full enrollment could significantly aid aquifer conservation. The committee adjourned after thanking the agencies and noting the next day’s agenda.

Transcript Highlights:

• Saved by the bell. Mark, you're up. Wow. 24-10, right? Chair Fey, Ranking Member Barkis, members.
• The airplane creates efficiencies that cannot be matched. It is a business tool.
• And I can tell you that this is not hyperbole, and people in the back trying to save money on taxes.
• So when Bluetooth was not paired, we had about a 64% match rate.
• We matched 88% from the app to the manual logs that were kept by our internal testers.

Bills: HB2347 , HB2410

Committee: House Transportation

Keywords: luxury aircraft tax, tax reduction, economic impact, business aviation, state revenue, HB2410, commercial truck safety, commercial vehicle safety, trucking industry, truck driver training, driver education, highway safety, traffic safety commission, Washington State, commercial motor vehicles, vehicle registration fee, IRP fee, state patrol highway account, safety enforcement fee, public-private partnership

Transcript Highlights:

• The status of the lignite research grants, there's the non-matching portion, the $4.5 million.
• So with this $10 million, $5 million was allocated on a non-matching basis.
• So that's been part of the reason why there hasn't been that much matched raised.
• At least last I visited, there's a lot of interest that just hasn't generated the matching cash yet.
• And the original bill was written without a match, and then the match got put in by the other chamber

Summary: The committee took roll, approved the March 18 minutes, and then received a compliance-report update on the Industrial Commission and related funds and programs. Staff reviewed the status of one-time appropriations and grant programs, including electric grid resiliency, lignite research, enhanced oil recovery, the Clean Sustainable Energy Authority, the salt cavern business-case study, and the new NDSU research and technology park grant. Members asked about funding balances, reimbursement timing, matching requirements, and how some commitments would affect the State Investment Fund and future biennia. Industrial Commission staff then gave a broader update on the agency’s administrative office, grant management system, leadership transitions at several commission agencies, and active grant rounds. They reported that the grant management system is nearing completion, that several agency leadership searches have concluded, and that the commission’s grant programs currently have 108 active grants totaling more than $165 million. They also described the Clean Sustainable Energy Authority round, the oil and gas research program’s enhanced oil recovery awards, the grid resiliency grants, the salt cavern study, and the research technology park program, noting that some projects are awaiting federal funds or additional matching cash. Ron Ness, speaking for the Oil and Gas Research Council, focused on the state of the oil industry and the enhanced oil recovery “Bakken 2.0” effort. He said production remains steady, but future growth depends on better infrastructure, longer laterals, and new EOR methods such as CO2, natural gas, and surfactants. He emphasized the importance of the Bakkeneast pipeline and related gas-utilization projects, the recent DOE funding that will return some money to the research council, and the need to modernize tax and incentive rules for CO2-based recovery. Members discussed the potential economic benefits for oil, agriculture, and manufacturing. The Bank of North Dakota then presented its compliance report and a broader strategic update. Bank leadership reviewed the bank’s mission, governance, participation lending, student lending, disaster programs, and legislatively directed programs, and said the bank is managing for a flatter deposit base and stronger liquidity because of fintech competition and changing market conditions. They reported improved earnings, with net income rising to about $231 million, and described Rough Rider Coin as a new internal payment rail for North Dakota banks and credit unions, not a public cryptocurrency. Members asked about student loan eligibility, disaster lending, and the bank’s capacity to support state programs while maintaining its balance-sheet and liquidity requirements.

Transcript Highlights:

• So in this case, the Fed Match program that the legislature authorized a couple of years ago, Thank you
• I think what we would be happy with is if this language matched up with what California and New York
• Retirees cannot afford to have politicians gamble with their retirement savings, so we must fiercely
• I was told the only way to save my money was to withdraw it from my savings account and put it in what
• My hard-earned savings, gone, never to be returned.

Committee: Joint Joint Committee on Bonding, Capital Expenditures and State Assets

Summary: The House Bonding Committee met to hear testimony on H. 5527, the Mass Wins Act, with Secretary of Economic Development Eric Paley opening by describing the bill as a follow-on to Mass Leads. He said the proposal includes $305 million in bond authorizations, with $180 million for new programs and $125 million to expand existing ones, plus $140 million in deauthorizations of unused or redundant authorizations. He highlighted investments in applied AI and quantum, robotics, business expansion capital, defense innovation, global business attraction, ag tech and food science, downtowns, and the creative economy, and said the bill is intended to support geographic equity and small business growth across the Commonwealth. Committee members questioned the administration on several policy sections, including the MassCEC climate-tech certification language, housing-related provisions tied to 40B compliance and site plan review, the removal of the LCSW exam, AI transparency and federal preemption concerns, and the effect of lower LLC filing fees. Paley generally said some contested sections were added by the Economic Development Committee rather than the administration, defended the MassCEC discretion language as necessary for climate certification, and said the administration would follow up on committee-added provisions. He also said the bill’s housing provisions were meant to help address the state’s need for more homes and that the deauthorizations were housekeeping measures that did not affect current capital plan projects. Public testimony covered a wide range of topics. AARP and local advocates urged a statewide ban on cryptocurrency ATMs, arguing they are heavily used in scams, impose high fees, and drain money from seniors and local economies. Housing groups supported codifying site plan review and adding parking reform and YIGBY-style housing on faith-owned land. Building trades asked to include off-site fabrication in prevailing wage law. The Massachusetts Public Banking Campaign backed the bill and urged inclusion of a public bank concept. Several witnesses supported Section 106, the Transparency and Frontier AI Act, as a way to require safety plans, audits, incident reporting, and whistleblower protections for the largest AI companies, while an AI startup group argued the section would overregulate smaller firms and should be separated from the bond bill. No votes were taken during the hearing.

Transcript Highlights:

• As I mentioned, the new BEAD rules prioritize cost savings.
• BEAD also required match funding, 25% match for almost all project areas unless they were deemed high
• But private match ultimately amounted to 100%. Areas unless they were deemed high cost.
• But private match ultimately amounted to $163 million.
• So I think that state match was really influential to making sure Are public entities.

Summary: The committee first heard an update from the Department of Commerce’s new state broadband director on Washington’s BEAD broadband program and permitting process. Jordan Arnold said Washington’s final BEAD proposal has been submitted to NTIA but remains unapproved after months of back-and-forth over federal rule changes, technology choices, cost, and tribal sovereignty. He said the program is expected to bring about $1 billion in broadband investment, connecting roughly 166,000 homes and small businesses, with a mix of fiber, fixed wireless, and low-earth-orbit satellite. He also outlined permitting challenges, including rights-of-way and environmental/historic reviews, and said the office is working on permitting roundtables, federal coordination, and NEPA expertise to speed reviews. Members asked about the interaction of NEPA and SEPA, the reduction in deployable federal BEAD dollars, the long-term value of fiber versus other technologies, and possible coordination with other infrastructure permitting efforts. The committee then took executive action on House Bill 2684, which would add Middle Eastern and North African groups to the Office of Minority and Women’s Business Enterprises’ socially disadvantaged certification framework. Four proposed amendments were considered and all failed: an amendment narrowing the rebuttable presumption to groups with specific current discrimination, an amendment requiring disaggregated subgroup data and limiting use of aggregated data, an amendment tying the rules to the state constitution, and two amendments requiring consistency with federal law and Attorney General review. After debate over whether the bill was too broad or needed more specificity, the committee voted 7-4 to report HB 2684 out with a do pass recommendation. Finally, the committee unanimously approved House Joint Memorial 4012, which urges Congress to address the 20-year rule affecting certain combat-injured veterans and seeks parity in recognition and benefits. The memorial was reported out with a do pass recommendation by an 11-0 vote, with two members excused.

Transcript Highlights:

• But to get onto the appropriation side, there's a $500,000 matching grant to be divided among North Dakota's
• There was another part of the bill that sort of matches out-of-state penalties with in-state penalties
• Essentially, it works out to a one-to-one from the state to the match.
• It was a one-to-two match, and they could use funds that they've already raised.
• It talks about the policy language that we added for the Military Museum and also matching funds for

Bills: HB1603

Committee: Senate Appropriations

Summary: The Appropriations Committee met with a quorum and announced it would begin meeting at 8 a.m. for the rest of the week to work through a growing bill list. The committee first approved House Bill 1603, a companion to the Historical Society budget dealing with NAGPRA, including a $500,000 matching grant to be divided among North Dakota’s five tribes and a committee to address repatriation of human remains and cultural items. The vote was unanimous, 15-0. The committee then considered House Bill 1225, which would increase penalties for reckless endangerment involving a firearm and create a mandatory prison term. After debate over public safety concerns versus the bill’s fiscal note and prison costs, the committee adopted a do not pass recommendation by a 9-6-1 vote. Members also discussed House Bill 1018, the State Historical Society budget, and approved an amendment that adjusted one-time funding items, including NAGPRA compliance, museum exhibits, military gallery funding, local historic grants, and line-of-credit repayment. The amended bill then received a due pass recommendation by a 14-2 vote. The committee next approved House Bill 1468, a behavioral health facility grant for St. Hayes, which supporters said would expand in-state access to acute and adolescent behavioral health care and reduce the need to send patients out of state. The bill passed 14-1. It then amended and passed House Bill 1485, increasing the personal needs allowance for certain Medicaid recipients by $15 and indexing it to inflation; the amendment and the bill as amended both passed 14-2. Finally, the committee approved House Bill 1016, the Adjutant General/National Guard budget, after adopting an amendment that funded disaster relief, response equipment, IT and website costs, and staffing changes for the watch center; the amended bill passed 14-2. The committee adjourned after completing six bills and planned to resume the next morning at 8 a.m.

Transcript Highlights:

• to $56.3 million in General Fund savings in 2026-27.
• This is a reduction in savings of $29.7 million from the Governor's budget.
• It's a savings to the state as a result of, It's actually very good.
• Reinstating the asset test punishes savings; it forces low-income individuals to spend down modest savings
• We should not be making budget decisions that penalize work, savings, and independence.

Summary: The Assembly Budget Subcommittee on Human Services held a hearing on the Governor’s May Revision, with no votes taken. The first major topic was child care and early education, where the Department of Social Services and Department of Finance outlined proposed changes to absorb federal Child Care and Development Fund and Proposition 64 revenue reductions, shift some funding between child care programs, end funding for prospective pay implementation now that the federal requirement has been rescinded, adjust the alternative payment administration structure, and fund child care infrastructure grants and a Low-Income Investment Fund contract closeout. The Legislative Analyst’s Office said the budget makes progress on the structural deficit but recommended maintaining the administration’s solution level, making reserve deposits, and avoiding new ongoing commitments; it also raised concerns about shifting reductions to the California Alternative Payment Program and about the proposed administrative-rate change. Committee members strongly criticized the proposed loss of child care slots and said they would oppose eliminating those slots, while also expressing support for child care as essential infrastructure. The committee then reviewed California State Preschool Program proposals. Finance and CDE described reductions to the preschool COLA from 2.41% to 2.01%, removal of prospective pay funding, and increases for the QRIS block grant, audit support, and rate reform implementation. Trailer bill language would codify age-based rate categories, inclusion-rate documentation, family fee collection rules, portability, and excused absences. CDE supported the QRIS increase and some attendance and family-fee changes, but warned that aligning three- and four-year-old rates could reduce support for three-year-olds and that the budget does not fully cover enrollment growth. Members also questioned whether the preschool and child care slot reductions should be reallocated rather than terminated, and the administration said the reductions were intended to reflect current utilization and avoid harm to currently enrolled families. The hearing then moved to CalFresh and nutrition programs. CDSS said the May Revision includes a one-time CalFood augmentation, funding to cover federal SNAP administrative cost-share pressures, and additional staffing and technical assistance to implement HR 1 changes, including the able-bodied adults without dependents time limit and new non-citizen eligibility rules. The department estimated HR 1 could cut CalFresh funding by $2.3 billion to $3.7 billion annually and affect about 500,000 people, with roughly 806,000 adults potentially subject to the time limit and about 34,000 non-citizens expected to lose eligibility once fully implemented. Members pressed for stronger harm mitigation, including a $98 million backfill to protect families from losing food benefits, and raised concerns about county workload and the “chilling effect” on immigrant participation. The final portion of the transcript began the IHSS presentation, noting a revised budget of $33.7 billion total funds and $12.8 billion General Fund, with proposed reductions tied to Medi-Cal asset-limit changes and other federal conformity items.

Transcript Highlights:

• So what is the ratepayer savings that would then come from that?
• We can save it for the later item. Did you want to ask you questions?
• Really looking for incentives for savings.
• Kim Stone of Stone Advocacy, another one on Team Save DSGS.
• I echo all the comments made about saving DSGS and extending it to 2028.