Transcript Highlights:

• cost increase?
• This independent evaluation found PATH helped cover these providers' initial operational costs and supported
• cost services.
• So fixed costs—laboratories basically operate with a lot of fixed costs.
• No, it's more like fixed costs.

Transcript Highlights:

• </c> operated forever. operated forever.
• </c> this is an ongoing cost. this is an ongoing cost.
• </c> operate at full capacity. operate at full capacity.
• We operate primarily on fixed price contracts with no ability to pass along the cost of overtime or temp
• </c> grinding operators. grinding operators.

Transcript Highlights:

• As such, the transition to a federal program with minimal state costs would be the most cost-effective
• We looked at cost reductions.
• So we're just asking for a backstop, just in case, to be able to cover the costs that we have for operating
• and higher costs.
• costs.

Transcript Highlights:

• ZEV fueling costs have a direct impact on the total cost of ownership.
• ZEV fueling costs have a direct impact on the total cost of ownership.
• It will kill the utilities on cost.
• And that costs a lot of money to keep replacing parts, getting people out there to operate and maintain
• So, as an owner and operator, we're owning and operating the public charging in Santa Monica.

Summary: The joint informational hearing of the Select Committee on Electric Vehicles and Charging Infrastructure focused on California’s EV market, charging infrastructure, and the effects of recent federal actions. The chair opened by emphasizing California’s progress on EV adoption and charging reliability, but also noted ongoing challenges with affordability, access, interoperability, heavy-duty electrification, and federal headwinds. She highlighted interest in technologies such as inductive charging and thanked host organizations and staff before moving to the first panel. State agency witnesses from Go-Biz, CARB, and the California Energy Commission described current programs and priorities. Go-Biz outlined its role in coordinating agencies, supporting permitting, and advancing the state’s ZEV market development strategy and equity action plan. CARB discussed federal attacks on its clean vehicle regulations, litigation to defend waiver authority, and the importance of incentives and regulatory programs such as Advanced Clean Trucks, Advanced Clean Fleets, Clean Truck Check, HVIP, and Clean Cars for All. The CEC detailed its funding and regulatory work on charging and fueling infrastructure, charger reliability, payment methods, roaming, and statewide planning, while stressing the need for more charging in multifamily housing and more public DC fast charging. All three agencies said federal rollbacks and permitting delays are major obstacles, but that California remains committed to expanding ZEV adoption. The second panel featured advocates, local government, utility, and research perspectives. CalETC urged continuous state funding through the Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund and emphasized the low-carbon fuel standard, multifamily charging, and managed charging. An EV advocacy group proposed a conquest-style state incentive for new and used EV buyers and argued that multifamily housing is a major untapped market, while also favoring Level 2 charging over Level 1 for most home and apartment settings. Los Angeles County and LADWP described large-scale local deployment of chargers, fleet electrification, workforce training, and the need for sustained funding, agency coordination, and streamlined permitting and grid interconnection. UCS recommended prioritizing replacement of older high-emitting vehicles, using fuel policy revenues to support cleaner cars, and expanding bidirectional charging. The chair closed by asking for more discussion on Level 1 versus Level 2 charging and noted the importance of education, affordability, and practical deployment strategies.

Transcript Highlights:

• at 50% cost recovery for biotoxin fees.
• Our operational costs, including staffing and equipment, have increased significantly since then.
• You know you talk about 50% cost recovery.
• If your fee cost, if your license costs $100, you have a 200% increase this year.
• So our company costs are over $50,000 a year just to be able to operate and sell our shellfish within

Bills: SB5816 , SB5971

Committee: Senate Agriculture & Natural Resources

Keywords: juice grapes, agriculture, commerce, state regulation, market access, green fertilizer, low-carbon, sustainability, incentive program

Transcript Highlights:

• okay, here's the cost to maintain and operate these systems.
• There are significant requests, one-time requests to help meet the operational costs.
• Of course, we support operational costs. We know you need to operate.
• So I support, obviously, you know, I support, obviously, the operational cost request, but I will be
• So we're thinking of them for this operational cost for sure. Okay. Thank you.

Summary: The Senate Budget Subcommittee No. 5 held an informational hearing on the Governor’s May Revision proposals for labor, public safety/judiciary, and transportation, and no votes were taken. In Part A on labor, the Employment Development Department described funding for EDD Next document management work, updated UI loan interest costs, disability insurance and paid family leave benefit increases, WIOA adjustments, UI and school employee benefit changes, an EMT training reappropriation, and a technical correction tied to an EDD Next reversion. PERB discussed reduced funding requests for AB 288 due to litigation and a proposal to implement AB 1 covering legislative employees. DIR presented proposals for legal unit reclassifications, two major IT modernization projects, a new Cal/OSHA emerging technologies unit, a COIA reappropriation, and trailer bill language requiring electronic payment of employer assessments and removing a salary cap for the DWC administrative director. CalHR proposed consolidating employee assistance services into a statewide contract with enhanced support for first responders, and CalPERS and CalSTRS presented budget adjustments tied to investment costs, state contributions, and benefit overpayments. Members focused heavily on the unemployment insurance debt and interest payments, asking why the administration had no concrete plan to pay down principal. Finance and LAO explained that the state’s UI tax structure has long been insufficient and that any long-term solution would need to address both the outstanding federal loan and the structural imbalance in employer taxes. Questions also centered on EDD Next costs and timelines, with the chair asking for clearer long-term project cost estimates and Finance noting that future maintenance and operations costs will continue after implementation. On DIR’s emerging technologies unit, members asked whether it would address AI-driven workplace harms; DIR said the unit would focus on physical workplace safety issues involving AI, robotics, autonomous equipment, and related guardrails, while LAO noted broader labor-practice questions would likely fall outside Cal/OSHA’s scope. In the CalPERS discussion, members raised concerns about transparency in private equity and external management fees, while CalPERS said higher fees reflect a strategy of greater private-market and active-management exposure and are offset by higher net returns. Members urged more information on specific investments and future reporting. For CalSTRS, Finance presented routine contribution and overpayment adjustments, but members also raised broader transparency concerns that CalSTRS staff said they would follow up on separately. Public comment in Part A was dominated by strong support for an immigrant worker emergency relief fund, along with support for apprenticeship and workforce proposals and PERB staffing. The chair and members said they would follow up on where the immigrant relief proposal should be considered, noting it may belong in another policy area. The hearing then moved into Part B with an overview of Judicial Branch-related May Revision items, including court interpreter funding, appellate court security, workload cap changes, lactation room implementation delays, and a reduction to the state court facility construction backfill.

Transcript Highlights:

• So in some ways, that's at no cost to the state in terms of operations.
• But again, 75%—three quarters—of our operating costs...
• But again, 75%—three quarters—of our operating costs are now coming from our member agencies, and fares
• We operate on an open system.
• funding, and the cost of services, and your... ...due to the gap in fare revenue, operations funding

Summary: The Senate Subcommittee on LOSSAN Rail Corridor Resiliency held an informational hearing focused on the corridor’s financial stability, service reliability, governance, capital planning, and long-term resiliency. Chair Lackey opened by criticizing the unfinished SB 1098 report and the underwhelming Transit Transformation Task Force work, arguing that the corridor remains at a crossroads with weak ridership recovery, poor on-time performance, and major capital projects that are not moving quickly enough. Senator Archuleta emphasized safety, maintenance, and the need to avoid state subsidy if ridership and revenues can support service. CalSTA and Caltrans described major state investments and ongoing planning efforts, including $125 million for San Clemente resiliency work, additional leveraged federal and state funds, more than $25 billion in funded projects in the pipeline, and the development of a corridor project database and service-planning tool under SB 1098. Caltrans also reported restoring Surfliner service to 13 weekday round trips between Los Angeles and San Diego, piloting expanded service to Santa Barbara and San Luis Obispo, and reorganizing internally to elevate transit and rail oversight. On zero-emission strategy, officials said hydrogen fuel-cell trains are being procured for longer-distance service while electrification remains the long-term ideal and battery-electric options are being explored for shorter routes. The committee then heard from Metrolink CEO Darren Kettle and Caltrain representative Jason Baker. Metrolink described its shift to “regional passenger rail,” with schedule changes aimed at all-day service, better transfers, and growth in student and weekend ridership, but warned of a fiscal cliff because member agencies now cover most operating costs while fare revenue remains low. Kettle said the agency has not reached consensus among its five county partners on a dedicated revenue solution and warned that service cuts may be unavoidable without new funding. Caltrain reported strong post-electrification ridership gains, improved customer satisfaction, and expanded service, but also warned of a large annual operating deficit that could force reductions in frequency, weekend service, stations, and evening operations if stable funding is not found. Members also discussed public safety, marketing, station placemaking, parking and concession revenue, and hydrogen fuel-cell technology. Senators urged stronger promotion of rail service, safer and cleaner stations, and more ambitious planning to match the state’s investments. No votes or formal actions were taken; the hearing was informational, with officials asked to continue reporting back on SB 1098, San Clemente planning, service performance, and funding solutions.

Transcript Highlights:

• So it's a cost of service.
• So that we can continue to operate.
• cost allocation.
• In terms of attributable cost and cost socialization, that's going to be a very different scenario than
• to fully repay all grid investments, including the cost of new generation if a facility ceases operations

Summary: The committee first heard SB 804, the Hydrogen Pipeline Safety Act, from Senator Arreguín. He said the bill would designate the State Fire Marshal as the safety regulator for intrastate hydrogen pipelines and require hydrogen-specific standards, while not mandating any pipeline construction or bypassing environmental review. Supporters included labor groups, utility employees, and the City of Burbank, while Air Products opposed unless amended, citing concerns about the bill’s specificity, fee structure, and the need for a hydrogen-specific rulemaking process. The committee discussed safety, fees, and regulatory certainty, and later passed SB 804 on a 9-0 vote to Emergency Management with commitment to take amendments. The committee then took up SB 905 by Senator Becker, aimed at reducing electricity rates by changing utility incentives. The bill would tie part of executive compensation to keeping rates below inflation, require more performance metrics, and allow the CPUC to consider lower returns on equity for certain lower-risk investments and alternative financing options. Support came from consumer, environmental, agricultural, and large energy user groups, while Southern California Edison, CalChamber, PG&E, and utility labor groups raised concerns that the bill could reduce investment, create regulatory uncertainty, and raise borrowing costs. After extensive discussion about utility affordability, wildfire costs, and capital markets, the committee passed SB 905 on a 7-1 vote to Appropriations. SB 913, also by Senator Becker, would create a clearer pathway for distributed energy resources such as batteries and smart thermostats to participate in the resource adequacy market and compete with utility-scale resources. Supporters said the bill would better use existing grid capacity, lower costs, and build on the state’s Demand Side Grid Support Program; PG&E opposed unless amended, saying the use case was not yet proven and was already being addressed in other rulemakings. After the committee accepted amendments, one opposition group moved to neutral and another said it might do so after reviewing the changes. The bill passed 8-0 to Appropriations and was placed on call. Several other measures were heard and advanced, including SB 1196 on faster utility hookups for small energization projects such as ADUs and EV chargers, SB 931 reauthorizing the Diablo Canyon Essential Services Mitigation Fund through 2028, SB 1158 reducing the frequency of joint reliability assessments from quarterly to twice yearly, and SB 1245 directing further study of California’s gasoline market and potential use of non-CARBOB fuel during supply disruptions. SB 1196 and SB 931 both passed with broad support and no opposition after amendments, SB 1158 passed without testimony, and SB 1245 drew strong support from consumer and environmental advocates but opposition from fuel industry and business groups concerned about costs, confidentiality, and fuel standards.

Transcript Highlights:

• The governor recommends $140,000 for a biennial total in operating costs, and the chairman concurs.
• </c> um for a bianial total in operating um for a bianial total in operating costs.<00:19:01.280><c>
• This will lead to uh a a bed cost<00:21:05.360><c> of</c> cost of cost of 6,026<00:21:07.840><c> and<
• </c><01:15:31.520><c> costs</c> account and perhaps the operating costs account and perhaps the operating
• costs, for that.

Committee: Senate Judiciary and Public Safety

Transcript Highlights:

• An operator comes out. They happen to see this.
• What does it cost?
• operators.
• And it does cost a lot. of money.
• and how they. operate like Florida.

Transcript Highlights:

• FDOT's engagement with seaport operations is that we work to ensure that all of our ports are operating
• We have to build it during ongoing operations.
• , strategic operations.
• , strategic operations.
• Of operations.

Committee: Senate Transportation

Summary: The Committee on Transportation heard SB 356 by Senator Wright, which would create an opt-in framework for counties and municipalities to allow utility-terrain vehicles (UTVs) on certain local roads with posted speed limits below 55 mph, subject to local safety determinations, licensing, insurance, and other restrictions. Supporters, including a retired sheriff and a Florida Sheriffs Association representative, argued the bill would give law enforcement clearer authority and reflect the reality that UTVs are already being used on roads, while opponents from the Recreational Off-Highway Vehicle Association and Honda warned that UTVs are not designed for public roads and lack key safety features. Several senators raised safety concerns, especially about speed and crash risk, but the bill was reported favorably after debate, with Senators Martin, McClain, and Truenow expressing reservations. The committee then held a lengthy discussion on seaport infrastructure and funding. FDOT presented data showing Florida’s 16 deepwater seaports generate major cargo volume, jobs, and economic impact, and described state funding programs such as FSTED, SPI, and the construction aggregate grant program. Port representatives from Port Everglades, PortMiami, Port of Palm Beach, and Port Tampa Bay described record cargo and cruise activity, major capital projects, and the importance of state and federal grants, private partnerships, and long-term planning. They also discussed challenges including limited land, bulkhead and berth maintenance, channel deepening, workforce needs, fuel access, resiliency, and intermodal connectivity. Senators asked about return on investment, trade patterns, financing, cruise-versus-cargo balance, and operational risks; the ports emphasized that they are largely enterprise-funded but still depend on public investment for major infrastructure. The committee also approved a block of appointments to the Tampa Hillsborough County Expressway Authority and the Tampa Port Authority without objection. In addition, FDOT presented the statewide mapping programs work group report required by SB 1662, recommending a coordinated statewide aerial imagery and LiDAR program, shared procurement and cost-sharing arrangements, and statutory updates to improve interagency coordination and access to geospatial data. Senators briefly discussed potential uses for the data in insurance, emergency management, and property assessment, and the presentation concluded without further action.

Transcript Highlights:

• But there's a cost with that.
• We also have financing DSOs for our convocation arena, convocation operations, stadium operations, and
• We also have financing DSOs for our convocation arena, convocation operations, stadium operations, and
• And when I say cost, it's really a loss of revenue associated with the university. It doesn't cost.
• Just looking at plant operation and maintenance at FSU, it was last funded in F1, plant operation and

Committee: Senate Appropriations Committee on Higher Education

Summary: The committee held an informational hearing on higher education funding, focusing on how Florida’s university system should be financed and whether a new funding model is needed. University system financial officers and Chancellor Ray Rodriguez discussed major cost drivers, including wages and benefits, utilities, maintenance, financial aid, research, and the effects of geography, institutional mission, and student mix. UF highlighted the cost of research and graduate programs; UCF and FAU pointed to growth, location, and cost of living; FAMU emphasized recruiting top-tier talent while relying on other revenue sources; and UNF noted the challenges of growth and long-term planning. Members also discussed the role of internal controls and audits in addressing excessive spending and questioned whether out-of-state tuition should be adjusted to help offset costs. On revenue sources beyond state appropriations and tuition, the panel described auxiliaries, restricted funds, capital projects, and component units such as foundations and health systems. Several universities noted that some revenues are restricted to specific purposes and cannot be used for general operations. FAMU explained that a large share of its capital project funding reflected active campus construction, while UF said its component-unit revenue is largely tied to UF Health. The Chancellor emphasized that the system’s low tuition and strong state support are central to Florida’s national standing, but also noted that some auxiliary revenues are pledged to debt and must be managed carefully. When discussing the current funding process, witnesses praised Florida’s performance-based funding model for aligning incentives with student success, transparency, and accountability. They also raised concerns about non-recurring appropriations, rising employee benefit costs, unfunded mandates, deferred maintenance, and the difficulty of multi-year planning. Suggestions for improvement included more recurring funding, better coverage of mandated costs, greater flexibility in fee-setting, and possible weighting for mission, geography, and institutional type. The Chancellor said the Board of Governors is considering a “version 3.0” of performance-based funding that would benchmark institutions against peers and Carnegie classifications, but any changes would require legislative action. On out-of-state tuition, most universities said they would prefer local board flexibility, while the Chancellor cautioned that increasing out-of-state enrollment or fees could affect future state support and should be balanced carefully.

Transcript Highlights:

• However, as operational costs rise, driven by increasing salaries, equipment replacement expenses, and
• by</c> as operational cost rise driven by as operational cost rise driven by increasing<02:33:46.680
• A significant portion of operations is supported by indirect cost recovery of dedicated funds overseen
• and maintenance cost for the operating and maintenance cost we<04:51:49.200><c> have</c><04:51:49.320
• </c> put it this way inflation operating put it this way inflation operating costs<04:52:22.120><c> everything

Summary: The Division 2 Finance Committee heard an overview and budget presentation from New Hampshire Fish and Game, led by new Executive Director Stephanie Simi and Business Division Chief Kathy Leonti. The agency described its mission to conserve and manage fish, wildlife, and marine resources, and emphasized growing pressures from disease, climate impacts, habitat change, and increased public demand. Simi said the department is largely funded by hunting and fishing license revenue and federal grants, is reviewing staffing and internal processes, and faces critical needs including permanent funding for environmental review staff, infrastructure and IT modernization, and possible service reductions if additional support is not found. Members asked about specific program and policy issues, including chronic wasting disease in deer, hemorrhagic disease in rabbits and hares, moose population decline, and a proposed bait-disease bill. The department said it is actively monitoring diseases and did not see a need for the bait bill at this time. Legislators also discussed the Hike Safe program, which the department said has grown from an expected $100,000 annually to more than $300,000, and a possible boating version of that program, which the department said remains under consideration but would involve complex logistics and multiple agencies. Questions were also raised about rescue costs, out-of-state hikers, and whether boat registrations could be used as a revenue source; Fish and Game said boat registration is handled by the Department of Safety, though the department receives $5 per registered boat for the public boat access program. The budget discussion focused on revenue projections, use of unrestricted Fish and Game funds, and dependence on federal reimbursements. Leonti said the department met the governor’s general fund target but not the Fish and Game fund target without using surplus unrestricted funds, leaving only about $100,000 in the fund by the end of the biennium. She said the budget uses more than $18 million in Fish and Game funds annually against about $14 million in unrestricted revenue, and that five of 193 full-time positions remain unfunded. The department warned that if federal grants were halted, it could cost about $5 million over five months and force the Fish and Game fund to cover the gap. Committee members also requested that future presentations be sent electronically in advance, and the department agreed to do so.

Transcript Highlights:

• One part is related to ownership and cost. The other part is related to operations and benefits.
• to $7 million, with ongoing operational costs of under half a million. and should take the lead and define
• The fiscal note estimates the cost cost.
• As I'm also looking at the fiscal note, the annual operating costs look like a super good deal to me
• What’s there in front of you is just the costs to the utilities directly to operate the system separately

Committee: Senate Energy and Natural Resources

Transcript Highlights:

• This is an existing operation.
• Matt Kremens here on behalf of the California-Nevada Conference of Operating Engineers and Operating
• Daniel Mappen, operator. Daniel Mopin, operating engineers, strongly opposed.
• And the CSU system, that was 39—excuse me, 53% of the total cost was on housing costs, compared to the
• costs on businesses.

Summary: The committee heard several climate, environmental, and housing bills. AB 1425, dealing with pit dewatering near the San Joaquin River Parkway, drew extensive testimony. The author and supporters argued the bill was needed to protect the river, groundwater, floodplain conditions, tribal and cultural resources, and public access from a proposed mining project near the river. Opponents, including Cemex, labor representatives, and industry groups, said the bill would bypass the CEQA process before it was complete, threaten jobs, and create uncertainty for an existing operation. Members questioned both sides about hydrology, blasting, dewatering, and the adequacy of the ongoing environmental review. The bill was moved, but several members expressed concern about preempting CEQA and some did not vote or voted no. AB 881, which would allow California to move forward with carbon capture and sequestration pipelines, was presented as a way to advance state climate goals and capture federal funding. Supporters, including SMUD, labor, and industry groups, said the bill would help deploy carbon capture safely and preserve jobs. Environmental justice opponents supported stronger safety direction and warned that CO2 pipelines pose serious risks and that the state should not move ahead without clearer standards. The bill received a due-pass recommendation to Appropriations. AB 1207, on the cap-and-trade allowance price ceiling and the social cost of carbon, was presented as a science-based update to California’s climate policy. The author and EDF said the bill would keep the program aligned with current economic and climate data and protect it from federal political interference. It received broad support and a due-pass recommendation. AB 1106, creating a coordinated network of air quality incident response centers, was also approved after testimony about wildfire smoke, toxic emissions, and the need for better real-time monitoring during disasters. AB 28, the Landfill Fire Safety Act, focused on the Chiquita Canyon landfill fire and related health impacts in Castaic and Val Verde; residents described serious illnesses and contamination concerns, while landfill and county representatives warned about costs and asked for more study. The committee nonetheless advanced the bill with a due-pass recommendation. The committee also heard AB 357, which would speed Coastal Commission review of student and faculty housing projects, with supporters citing student homelessness and opponents urging caution but acknowledging the need for more housing; the bill was presented and discussed, with the committee emphasizing the need to balance housing production and coastal oversight.

Transcript Highlights:

• Is there all-inclusive operations and capital costs? And you do self-reporting to Texas?
• It is significant cost, it's a significant cost.
• It cost me 86 bucks to dredge and get an acre foot of water. if that's what it costs over time, then,
• Today we gave them 80% of the water rights forever with no reopeners on cost and all they do is pay costs
• LCRA actually sells it to the. them at cost at about $50 an acre foot, but we have record input cost

Committee: House Natural Resources

Transcript Highlights:

• If funding to fully cover operating costs of the Commission through 2029 is not received by the end of
• We receive cost-based reimbursement as a critical access hospital. ...both of which operate at a loss
• Farms operate on thin margins and asset-heavy balance sheets; publicizing costs or debts harms competitiveness
• Finally, there may be a cost to state-operated health care facilities, such as the UW medical facilities
• Finally, there may be a cost to state-operated health care facilities, such as the UW medical facilities

Bills: HB1316 , HB2401 , HB2557 , HB2720 , HB1073 , HB2685 , HB2640 , HB2403

Committee: House Appropriations

Keywords: postsecondary education, homelessness, foster youth, education access, support programs, commission, gender equity, boys, men, advocacy, state policy, special education, parental rights, educational access, evaluation reports, disability services, behavioral health, emergency services, health insurance, provider access

Transcript Highlights:

• </c> Um this wouldn't necessarily be no cost. Um this wouldn't necessarily be no cost.
• Right now we are operating off of the February 2026 forecast, and that has not built in lease levy costs
• </c> operating capital in the general fund. operating capital in the general fund.
• </c> is a cost reimbursementbased formula. is a cost reimbursementbased formula.
• budget</c><01:37:03.280><c> for</c> annual cost in our operating budget for annual cost in our operating

Bills: HF3790 , HF3654 , HF3371 , HF3470 , HF1099

Committee: House Education Finance

Transcript Highlights:

• Operating adjustment certainly is a highest priority for us uh for DPS is our operating adjustment.
• these costs and this is absorbing costs these costs and this is especially<00:09:42.160><c> the</c><
• Uh line 16, the operating aid.
• </c><00:28:31.520><c> Uh</c> operating account. Uh operating account.
• Line 242, we have bed costs on cost.

Committee: Senate Finance

Transcript Highlights:

• for increased trial court operational costs, $11 million for increased pay rates for Supreme Court and
• 15% were startup costs.
• Redesigns affect real costs and risks.
• We're cost recovery facilitators.
• And the costs associated with those re-scrapes are typically absorbed into the operation.”

Summary: The subcommittee met to hear budget-related updates from the Judicial Branch and the Office of Emergency Services, with no votes taken. The Judicial Council supported the Governor’s proposed budget, highlighting $70 million for increased trial court operating costs, additional funding for court-appointed counsel, Court of Appeal case processing, and courthouse construction and facilities. Trial court representatives emphasized staffing retention problems, especially in counties like San Bernardino, and said stable funding is needed to avoid delays and maintain access to justice. Members also discussed the branch’s remote proceedings program, which has been used in more than 6 million hearings statewide since 2022 and was described as especially important in rural areas and for vulnerable litigants; several members urged making the authority permanent rather than extending it temporarily. A major portion of the hearing focused on Proposition 36 implementation. Finance said the Governor’s budget maintains the $130 million provided in the 2025 Budget Act for court workload and pretrial services, but adds no new Prop. 36 court funding. Judicial Council staff reported nearly 35,000 felony Prop. 36 filings in 2025, with most cases still pending and only a small share of treatment-mandated cases already dismissed after treatment. Witnesses said courts are using the funds for staffing, coordinators, clerks, and treatment-court operations, but that workload varies widely by county and that data collection is limited because courts report aggregate information rather than case-level outcomes. The LAO raised a technical concern about the Department of Finance’s Prop. 47 savings estimate and recommended revising the methodology at May Revision. The committee also reviewed the Orange Central Justice Center facility modification project, where the Judicial Council explained that hidden construction deficiencies and fire-life-safety issues caused costs to rise substantially after demolition began. The LAO said the project itself was supportable but recommended that the Legislature set an ongoing funding level for court facilities, require a long-term facilities plan, and consider more oversight of facility modification projects. Finance said it continues to fund courthouse projects individually and through the State Public Works Board, while acknowledging project delays and cost increases. Finally, Cal OES and advocates discussed victim services funding. Cal OES said it administers about $315 million annually for victim service programs, including VOCA-funded services, but federal VOCA allocations have fluctuated sharply and the state has used one-time General Fund backfills to maintain services. Trauma recovery center advocates warned that an 85% reduction in funding would sharply reduce services for survivors of violent crime, while human trafficking advocates urged reauthorization of the Human Trafficking Victim Assistance Program before funding reverts to pre-pandemic levels in July 2026. Members asked about federal and state funding stability, referral pathways, and the long-term value of these programs in preventing worse outcomes and reducing public costs.