Transcript Highlights:

• These reflect errors in the budget change proposal.
• These reflect errors in the budget change proposal.
• As noted, the Budget Act moved some funds around, about 18 million of that was moved As noted, the Budget
• Will there be an impact to the Lifeline budget?
• That is why we support the Governor's proposed budget.

Summary: The hearing was an informational budget session on energy agency proposals, with no votes taken. Early discussion focused on Proposition 4 climate bond implementation, including funding for demand-side grid support, offshore wind development, and transmission financing. The Department of Finance said the budget includes allocations for demand-side grid support and offshore wind, but not yet for the $325 million transmission financing piece pending a required study. The Legislative Analyst’s Office urged the Legislature to consider whether to wait on offshore wind funding, whether to keep shifting funds into demand-side grid support, and how to direct future transmission financing. Members also raised concerns about local technical assistance for offshore wind, Salton Sea priorities, and the need for more information before final decisions. The California Energy Commission and CPUC then reviewed the broader energy package. The CEC highlighted the demand-side grid support program’s growth, distributed energy backup assets, long-duration storage, hydrogen grants, and the SIRP clean energy reliability program. CPUC testimony emphasized affordability, wildfire mitigation costs, rooftop solar cost shifts, and efforts to reduce rates while maintaining reliability and clean energy goals. Members questioned CPUC staffing, delays in proceedings, coordination with the CEC and CAISO, and the impact of rate increases on customers. The agencies also discussed the AB 3264 transmission financing study, with CPUC saying work on the study had already begun and was on track for the July 1 deadline. Several trailer bill and implementation items were also discussed. The committee reviewed a proposal to extend the Deaf and Disabled Telecommunications Program surcharge, with members split over whether it should be handled in budget trailer bill language or policy legislation; the administration said the surcharge supports a critical program serving about three-quarters of a million Californians. The committee also heard a CPUC data-sharing proposal to allow nondisclosure agreements for transmission and reliability data, which members generally supported as a technical fix. DWR explained a proposal to clarify language for the Electricity Supply Strategic Reliability Reserve so it can potentially sell three gas-fired units it owns, and the CEC presented a federal transmission grant proposal tied to grid-enhancing technologies and ratepayer cost recovery. Finally, the committee discussed California Lifeline and possible broadband pilot reforms in light of uncertainty around federal Universal Service Fund support, with CPUC saying it is exploring a statewide standalone broadband option for eligible customers.

Transcript Highlights:

• This is the Assembly Budget Subcommittee 2 on Human Services.
• This is the Assembly Budget Subcommittee 2 on Human Services.
• Things like system of care reform from the child welfare system.
• When we make a budget agreement, people are making plans.
• It's in the budget. It's just not being implemented yet.

Summary: The Assembly Budget Subcommittee on Human Services held a hearing on developmental services, rehabilitation, and related supports, with no votes taken. The first major topic was the Master Plan for Developmental Services. Administration officials described a year-long, community-driven process that included a steering committee, work groups, and statewide engagement sessions, and said the final draft would be released that Friday with about 170 recommendations. The Department of Developmental Services said the plan would inform future work, but did not offer a detailed implementation roadmap. The LAO said the plan contains significant policy and budget implications, may require statutory changes, and needs further analysis to turn recommendations into actionable proposals. Advocates and regional center representatives urged the Legislature and administration to avoid letting the plan sit on a shelf, called for prioritization and ongoing stakeholder oversight, and emphasized the need to address equity, workforce, service coordination, and cross-system collaboration. The chair said he wanted to work with the LAO on trailer bill language and future reporting to create a clearer path forward. The second topic was the Office of Employment First and competitive integrated employment. Administration witnesses said California has ended subminimum wage under SB 639, but that moving people into competitive integrated employment remains a major priority. They described existing efforts such as DDS’s coordinated career pathways pilot, paid internships, job development services, benefits counseling, and DOR’s career counseling and referral services, along with pilot projects in San Diego and Orange County. The State Council on Developmental Disabilities and advocates argued that employment outcomes have remained stuck at roughly 15% and that a dedicated Employment First Office is needed to coordinate across agencies, align goals, and improve outcomes. The LAO recommended regular legislative oversight on people transitioning out of subminimum wage and asked for technical assistance on coordinated career pathways. The chair criticized the administration’s decision to effectively eliminate funding for the office, requested a detailed implementation timeline and quarterly transition reports, and said the committee would continue pressing for the office to be implemented. The final issue was respite services, utilization trends, and access. DDS reported that in-home respite use and spending have risen sharply over several years, with about 150,000 people using respite in 2023-24 and expenditures reaching about $1 billion. Officials said access depends on families knowing the service exists, service coordinators identifying need, and having enough providers, especially in rural and linguistically diverse communities. The San Diego Regional Center said utilization generally mirrors statewide trends, but access is stronger in some areas, such as Imperial County, where families often prefer family-directed or agency-supported models that allow them to hire trusted workers. Committee members emphasized the importance of respite for family health and caregiver well-being, asked whether service coordinators are asking practical questions about sleep and stress, and discussed the need for better identification of complex behavioral and medical needs. DDS said a standardized family support tool and updated IPP process are intended to improve consistency, transparency, and person-centered assessment for respite and related services.

Transcript Highlights:

• Because these pillars have really helped us move forward past reform.
• First, fees, along with governance reform, offered fee reform.
• This is a tremendous achievement from reform efforts.
• More generally on fees, DTSC is in better standing as compared to pre-reform.
• We are glad that there have been some reforms.

Summary: The joint oversight hearing focused on DTSC’s implementation of SB 158 reforms, including enforcement, community engagement, fee stability, the hazardous waste management plan, permitting backlogs, and the Safer Consumer Products program. Senators and Assembly members emphasized protecting overburdened communities and asked how DTSC and the Board of Environmental Safety are using their authority to improve accountability, reduce delays, and address hazardous waste facilities and consumer product chemicals. The hearing also included discussion of extended producer responsibility programs and whether DTSC can support them more efficiently, including through coordination with CalRecycle. DTSC Director Katie Butler said the department is now more transparent, accountable, and fiscally stable, citing stronger enforcement actions, an interactive inspections map, expanded community outreach, and emergency response work on the Los Angeles wildfire cleanup. She said DTSC has made progress on fee reform, the hazardous waste management plan, cleanup grants, permit renewals, and safer consumer products rulemaking, including adding microplastics to the candidate chemical list. Board Chair Andrew Rakestraw said the board has held multiple public meetings and hearings, is working on fee rates and performance metrics, and is revising the hazardous waste management plan after public comment, including removing a proposal to send certain contaminated soil to municipal landfills. He also noted remaining concerns about fee structure, permit delays, and the pace of the safer consumer products program. Public witnesses offered sharply different views. A representative of the California Council for Environmental and Economic Balance said SB 158 reforms have improved permitting and transparency, but urged more attention to risk-based decision-making, reduced duplication, and possible General Fund support for plan implementation rather than relying only on fees. Earthjustice argued DTSC remains too slow and that communities continue to suffer from long-delayed permits and weak protections, urging the Legislature to take a more active role and to prioritize eliminating hazardous substances rather than minimizing costs. Committee members pressed the witnesses on permit renewals, community impacts, and the pace of the safer consumer products program, while DTSC defended its progress and said further legislative collaboration may be needed on hazardous waste management and emerging waste streams.

Transcript Highlights:

• I'm director of the Minnesota Budget Project.
• project the Minnesota Minnesota budget project the Minnesota budget<00:09:24.519><c> project</c><00:
• </c> that pre- determines tax or budget that pre- determines tax or budget choices<00:10:55.360><c> limits
• Motion prevails. out and we grew our budget by 40% with out and we grew our budget by 40% with the<00
• </c><00:14:48.600><c> um</c> motans to have their budgets um motans to have their budgets um individually

Summary: The committee took up House File 4, first adopting the H004A1 amendment without objection. The author described the bill as a constitutional amendment intended to create a tax relief account funded from projected budget surpluses, defined as revenues exceeding 105% of projected expenditures based on the November forecast. Supporters framed the proposal as a way to return excess taxpayer money to families, homeowners, and seniors rather than allowing the state to retain or redirect it. Testimony in support came from Ranna Lee of Americans for Prosperity, who praised the bill’s clarity and argued that taxpayers are overburdened and should receive surplus funds back; she also suggested broader tax and budget reforms, including rate reductions and tighter spending limits. Nan Madden of the Minnesota Budget Project testified in opposition, saying the legislature already has authority to use surpluses for rebates or tax cuts and warning that constitutionalizing tax policy would reduce flexibility, weaken accountability, and make it harder to respond to changing conditions, emergencies, or recessions. Members then briefly commented, with Republicans expressing support for returning money to taxpayers and citing cost-of-living pressures and fixed incomes. The committee did not hear a formal department position. At the end of the hearing, Representative Johnson renewed the motion that House File 4, as amended, be recommended to pass and sent to the Ways and Means Committee; the motion prevailed on a voice vote.

Transcript Highlights:

• While California's pending budget deficit and the balancing budget requirement, it's important to better
• And the key thing, again, about this reform are two, actually.
• And the key thing, again, about this reform, are two, actually.
• I'm a Senior Policy Fellow at the California Budget and Policy Center.
• We know state leaders are facing difficult budget decisions now and in the future.

Summary: The joint informational hearing examined California’s taxation of multinational corporations, especially the state’s water’s-edge election versus worldwide combined reporting. The LAO and Franchise Tax Board explained the basic mechanics of unitary taxation, apportionment, and how water’s-edge generally excludes most foreign subsidiaries while worldwide reporting includes the full unitary group. FTB officials said water’s-edge filers are a small share of corporate filers but account for a large share of tax liability, and they described filing trends, industry mix, and the administrative steps needed to administer either system. Members and witnesses debated the policy trade-offs. Supporters of moving away from water’s-edge argued that it enables profit shifting, especially for large multinational and IP-heavy firms, and that eliminating it could raise significant revenue and improve fairness for smaller domestic businesses. They cited estimates of billions in potential revenue and said California already has the audit and reporting infrastructure to handle worldwide reporting, though some transition time would be needed. Opponents argued that worldwide reporting would tax foreign activity unrelated to California, create double taxation, increase compliance burdens and litigation, and could be difficult for foreign-based multinationals to document. They also warned that some of the revenue estimates are highly uncertain because foreign affiliate income is not directly observable. Committee members asked about foreign government pushback, the risk of companies leaving California, the effect on intellectual property shifting, and whether federal or Supreme Court action could block a change. Witnesses generally said major firms would be unlikely to leave because California taxes sales rather than physical presence, but some costs could be passed on to consumers. The panel also discussed alternatives such as conforming to federal international tax rules like NCTI/GILTI and adding anti-abuse rules. No vote or bill action was taken; the hearing was informational only.

Transcript Highlights:

• While California's pending budget deficit and the balancing budget requirement, it's important to better
• It takes advantage of national, international reforms that I will talk about in a second.
• And the key thing, again, about this reform are two, actually.
• I'm a Senior Policy Fellow at the California Budget Policy Center.
• We know state leaders are facing difficult budget decisions now and in the future.

Summary: The joint informational hearing focused on California’s taxation of foreign subsidiaries of U.S. corporations, especially the state’s water’s-edge election versus worldwide combined reporting. Committee members and witnesses discussed how unitary taxation and sales-factor apportionment work, why multinational corporations are a small share of filers but a large share of tax liability, and how foreign income, profit shifting, and double taxation concerns affect policy choices. The Franchise Tax Board explained current filing rules, the seven-year water’s-edge election, and recent filing statistics showing about 21,562 water’s-edge returns in 2023, roughly 6% of C corporation filers but about half of corporate tax liability. The Legislative Analyst’s Office and FTB staff emphasized that revenue effects from eliminating water’s edge are uncertain because foreign affiliate income is not directly observable, and they noted possible revenue volatility and administrative complexity. Several committee members asked about foreign government pushback, the burden on FTB, whether certain industries are more likely to shift profits, and whether companies would leave California; witnesses generally said there was no strong evidence that firms would exit the state because tax liability is driven mainly by California sales. They also discussed how California already administers both methods, how the election can be advantageous or disadvantageous depending on a firm’s facts, and how federal reforms like GILTI/NCTI, CAMT, and OECD Pillar Two may affect the issue. The second panel presented sharply contrasting views. One professor and a tax policy advocate argued that water’s edge creates unfairness, encourages profit shifting, and leaves California with billions in lost revenue, while a Tax Foundation witness argued that mandatory worldwide reporting would tax the wrong income, create double taxation and litigation risk, and impose heavy compliance burdens, especially for foreign-based multinationals. A later panel from the California Budget and Policy Center supported closing the “water’s-edge loophole,” saying it would raise needed revenue for public services and level the playing field between large multinationals and smaller domestic businesses. No vote or formal action was taken; the hearing was informational only.

Transcript Highlights:

• State government has to return to how budgets looked before COVID-19.
• operating budget.
• today's budget climate.
• That limits the ways we can balance the budget.
• Our budget supports funding for Prosperity to expand its proven Our budget supports funding for Prosperity

Transcript Highlights:

• What is needed is reform. forward.
• What is needed is reform. reform<00:06:55.440><c> of</c><00:06:55.759><c> land</c><00:06:56.080><c> use
• If our state's general fund budget was an entire gallon jug of water, under this new budget we're about
• </c> jug of water, uh under this new budget jug of water, uh under this new budget we're<00:28:16.880
• > uh</c> economic security. under this budget uh economic security. under this budget uh we<00:29:20.960

Transcript Highlights:

• At a time when the state's budget is stressed and strained, with further cuts...
• Other states have already enacted similar reforms and have saved money.
• . ...here today that set reforms that would help, that would alleviate the issue.
• I hope we can lead in PBM reform, and we really need your help. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Quinn.
• I urge you to support H1234 and PBM reform to protect patient access across Massachusetts.

Committee: Joint Joint Committee on Financial Services

Summary: The committee held a lengthy hearing on a large docket of pharmacy and drug-pricing bills, with most testimony focused on PBM reform, 340B drug discount program protections, specialty medication access, and medication adherence. Chair James Murphy and Senator Paul Feeney opened the hearing and took testimony from legislators, patient advocates, pharmacists, health center leaders, industry representatives, and policy groups. Several speakers described delays, denials, high out-of-pocket costs, and pharmacy closures tied to PBM practices, while others emphasized the importance of community health centers and independent pharmacies in serving patients. On the 340B program, supporters including Senator Eldridge, Senator Payano, Community Care Cooperative, Fenway Health, the Massachusetts League of Community Health Centers, and several community health center leaders argued that bills such as H. 1107 and S. 819 would stop discriminatory PBM and manufacturer practices, preserve contract pharmacy access, and protect safety-net providers that say they reinvest savings into care, pharmacy expansion, interpreter services, behavioral health, and other services. Opponents including PhRMA, the Community Liver Alliance, and a public policy analyst argued the program lacks transparency and accountability, has grown beyond its original purpose, and may benefit large hospitals and for-profit entities more than low-income patients. They urged more reporting and oversight rather than expanding protections. On PBM reform, testimony supported bills including H. 1157, H. 1234, S. 724, S. 831, and related measures that would require rebate pass-through, ban spread pricing, limit steering to PBM-owned pharmacies, and improve reimbursement for community pharmacies. Independent pharmacists and patients said current PBM practices raise costs, create administrative burdens, and threaten access to local pharmacies. PCMA, representing PBMs, opposed the reforms, arguing PBMs lower costs, that plan sponsors choose to contract with them, and that the Health Policy Commission and CHIA should complete their ongoing study before new mandates are adopted. The committee also heard support for H. 1322 and S. 734 on specialty medications, and for H. 781 and H. 1305 on medication synchronization to improve adherence. No votes or formal actions were taken during the hearing.

Transcript Highlights:

• Welcome, this is the Assembly Budget Subcommittee No. 2 on Human Services.
• Set of budget and policy proposals for the legislature to consider.
• And the first investment came in the budget in 2020.
• A lot can happen between now and the enactment of the federal budget.
• It is there; it's in the budget; it's just not being implemented yet.

Transcript Highlights:

• ><c> Congressional</c><00:42:31.680><c> Budget</c> experts at the Congressional Budget experts at the
• And the best way for us to reform ICE is to keep our laser focused on ICE reform.
• </c> be at the expense of ICE reform. be at the expense of ICE reform.
• </c> reform ICE by passing this bill today. reform ICE by passing this bill today.
• </c> leverage to demand much needed reforms. leverage to demand much needed reforms.

Transcript Highlights:

• Prefer cutting spending as the way to balance the budget.
• I don't have a big budget to do this. I do this because of love of country.
• One of their top goals is the so-called balanced budget amendment.
• A reformed United Nations would allow for that.
• A reformed United Nations would allow for that.

Committee: Joint Joint Committee on Veterans and Federal Affairs

Summary: The hearing of the Joint Committee on Veterans and Federal Affairs was opened by Chair Joe McGonagle and Vice Chair Senator Mike Rush, who noted that Chair John Velis was deployed with the Massachusetts National Guard. The chairs explained the hybrid format, three-minute testimony limit, live streaming, and filing deadlines, and said the committee would hear 11 House bills and eight Senate bills dealing with federal and overseas issues. Much of the hearing centered on competing resolutions about Article 5 constitutional conventions, along with related resolutions on D.C. statehood, child labor, Citizens United, and Cambodia. Supporters of H. 4692 and S. 284, a joint resolution to rescind all prior Massachusetts Article 5 convention applications, argued that old resolutions from the 1930s and 1970s could be used to count Massachusetts toward the 34-state threshold for calling a federal constitutional convention. Testifiers from Common Cause, the League of Women Voters, the ACLU, Reproductive Equity Now, labor groups, and others warned that a convention would have no clear rules, could not be reliably limited to specific topics, and could put civil rights, reproductive rights, labor protections, and other constitutional protections at risk. Several speakers also cited a recent federal lawsuit and said the safest course was to remove outdated applications from the books. A large opposing panel testified in support of H. 3888, a resolution calling for a Convention of States to propose amendments limiting federal power, imposing fiscal restraints, and establishing term limits. Supporters argued that Article 5 provides a lawful way to address federal overreach, debt, and congressional stagnation, and said the process would be limited by state applications and ratification by 38 states. Some committee members and witnesses raised concerns about a runaway convention, broad language in the resolution, and whether Congress could or should set rules for such a convention. Representative Gentile also testified in support of several related resolutions on overturning Citizens United, D.C. statehood, and the child labor amendment, while Representative Howard and Representative Tongue supported a Cambodia resolution condemning political oppression and urging free and fair elections. No votes or final actions were taken during the hearing.

Transcript Highlights:

• Looking ahead to the budget year, we are encouraged by the increased— Looking ahead to the budget year
• The Governor's budget does not include an appropriation for Cal Grant reform.
• The Governor's budget does not include an appropriation for Cal Grant reform, and that is due to the
• here and this little budget there.
• changes to the state library budget.

Summary: The subcommittee on Education Finance heard an overview of the governor’s budget proposals and higher education financial aid trends, with a major focus on the Middle Class Scholarship (MCS), Cal Grant spending, and the effects of recent federal student aid changes. The Department of Finance said the budget would fully fund Cal Grant at projected levels and reduce MCS coverage from 35% to 17.5% of unmet need in 2026-27, while the Legislative Analyst’s Office supported considering the reduction as a cost-saving measure given out-year deficits. UC and CSU representatives opposed the cut, saying MCS is important to affordability and debt-free degree goals; they estimated average awards would fall substantially and that campuses do not have funds to backfill the loss. The Student Aid Commission said the proposal would reduce aid but simplify administration, and members questioned how lower awards would affect students, borrowing, and work-study options. No vote was taken, and the issue was held open for possible future action. The committee then discussed federal changes to student loans and Pell Grant policy under H.R. 1, including caps on Parent PLUS loans, elimination of Grad PLUS loans, and new proration rules for federal direct loans based on enrollment intensity. The LAO said these changes would likely push some borrowers into the private market, especially graduate and professional students and some parents of students at private institutions. CSU said the changes would affect thousands of graduate and part-time students and could reduce access by about $97 million in loan availability for part-time borrowers, while UC said the new definitions of professional degrees were too restrictive and would reduce access for nursing, teaching, law, dentistry, and other programs. Community colleges said they use relatively little federal loan aid but are monitoring Workforce Pell. Members raised concerns about workforce impacts, social mobility, and whether the state should consider alternative loan programs or other ways to reduce student costs. This issue was also held open. In the segment financial aid update, the LAO reported Cal Grant spending is projected to rise to about $3.2 billion in 2026-27, driven by more recipients and higher awards tied to UC and CSU tuition increases, while CSAC said FAFSA and CADAA applications are up significantly year over year. CSU, community colleges, and UC described their aid packaging and rising aid totals, with CSU reporting over $5.5 billion in aid to 381,000 students, community colleges reporting over $4.3 billion to more than 920,000 students, and UC reporting $3.17 billion in grant aid to undergraduates. Members asked about Cal Grant reform, application trends, and long-term outcomes; UC and community colleges pointed to alumni and wage dashboards, and the LAO noted the state’s Cradle to Career data effort. The committee then took public comment, including testimony on library funding and other education-related priorities, and concluded by holding the issues open without formal action.

Transcript Highlights:

• Okay, the INNOVATE Act, a bill to reauthorize and comprehensively reform the SBIR-STTR program.
• And what reforms should Congress consider? Thank you, Chair Ernst, for that question.
• So the PBBE Reform Report, or the Commission on Planning, Programming, Budgeting, and Execution is, I'm
• analysis of SBIR and SCTR projects as budget requests are being developed.
• , as the budget requests are being developed.

Committee: Senate Small Business and Entrepreneurship Committee

Keywords: SBIR, STTR, Innovate Act, small business, innovation, legislative reforms, economic growth, funding, technology transfer

Summary: The meeting focused on the Small Business Innovation Research and Small Business Technology Transfer Programs (SBIR-STTR), emphasizing the critical reforms necessary to enhance their effectiveness. Chair Ernst introduced the Innovate Act to streamline processes, ensuring funding is awarded based on merit and addressing existing abuses within the system. The discussion was robust, with numerous members expressing concerns about phase transitions and the need for targeted funding to support impactful technological innovations. The conversation also highlighted the program's importance in fostering economic growth, particularly for small businesses in rural areas, and the urgency for legislative changes as the program's authorization approaches expiration.

Transcript Highlights:

• </c> only state funding and our budget only state funding and our budget request<00:04:25.280><c> but
• </c><00:15:35.519><c> which</c> including the 2024 pering reform which including the 2024 pering reform
• </c> proposed in the governor's 2627 budget proposed in the governor's 2627 budget for<01:24:17.320><
• </c> adjustment proposed to offset budget adjustment proposed to offset budget pressure<01:24:36.239>
• </c> stress on these systems this budget stress on these systems this budget initiative<01:26:31.560>

Committee: Senate Energy, Utilities, Environment, and Climate

Transcript Highlights:

• But the truth is, it's a time for reform. It's a time to build more housing.
• We urgently need more housing and smart reform.
• Senate Bill 6026 is a smart, targeted reform.
• Obviously, tough budget years.
• Obviously tough budget ears.

Summary: The committee heard Senate Bill 6026, which would require cities and counties planning under the Growth Management Act with populations of 30,000 or more to allow residential uses in commercial and mixed-use zones and bar local governments from requiring ground-floor commercial or retail as a condition of housing approval, with exemptions for certain sensitive areas and a carve-out for transit-oriented development station areas. The prime sponsor, Senator Alvarado, and supporters from the governor’s office, Commerce, housing advocates, developers, and major employers argued the bill would unlock underused land, reduce costs, and help address the state’s housing shortage. Opponents and local government representatives from small towns, counties, and cities said the bill could harm commercial corridors, small businesses, tax base stability, and local planning flexibility, and asked for narrower exemptions or additional carve-outs. No vote was taken on SB 6026 during the hearing. The committee then held executive action on Senate Bill 5937 and Senate Bill 5938. SB 5937, dealing with smart access systems and tenant privacy, was amended to clarify that keypad-only entry is not covered, require written privacy policies within five days of installation, and add operational purposes to allowable data collection; the committee adopted the amendment and advanced the bill with a due pass recommendation. SB 5938, which changes the foreclosure prevention fee and directs a Commerce study on a state homeowner assistance fund, was also amended to extend the study deadline and related expiration date; the committee adopted the amendment and moved the bill forward with a due pass recommendation. The committee then heard Senate Bill 6018, which would expand and modernize the Washington State Housing Finance Commission’s authority, including allowing direct mortgage lending to borrowers, extending bond counsel selection cycles, removing advance notice requirements for bond issuance, and repealing an outdated housing finance plan/program. The sponsor and the commission said the bill would improve efficiency and create new financing tools for affordable housing, while banking groups said they supported the goal but wanted clearer limits to ensure the commission would not enter first-mortgage lending for homebuyers. The sponsor and commission said they would work on clarifying language. Finally, the committee heard Senate Bill 6027 and Senate Bill 6028. SB 6027 would expand the use of local housing sales taxes and the Affordable Housing for All account to support operations, maintenance, rehabilitation, and preservation of existing affordable housing, update REET exemption timing, and align the definition of emergency housing with the Growth Management Act; local governments, housing providers, and advocates strongly supported the bill as a way to preserve existing housing amid rising costs and federal funding uncertainty. SB 6028 would create a revolving loan fund administered by the Housing Finance Commission to finance mixed-income affordable homeownership projects with long-term affordability covenants; the sponsor said it would help builders who have entitled sites but face high capital costs, and the hearing began with staff briefing and sponsor testimony, with questions from members starting as the transcript ended.

Transcript Highlights:

• we did some reform in '13, '14, and '15, and we keep adjusting this and then we do other reform.
• Several of these changes are also proposed in the governor's budget.
• </c><01:12:20.120><c> in</c> for your review of Permitting reform in for your review of Permitting reform
• reform real permitting reform permitting reform real permitting reform would<01:16:11.239><c> Center
• </c> growth of our state we support reforms growth of our state we support reforms that<01:18:07.239>

Committee: House Environment and Natural Resources Finance and Policy

Transcript Highlights:

• And these are long-term reforms, not quick fixes.
• In 2024, during the budget for Kentucky.
• ,</c><00:04:33.759><c> not</c> And these are long-term reforms, not And these are long-term reforms,
• I care assistance partnership reform.
• </c><00:13:18.399><c> process</c> outcomes through the reform process outcomes through the reform process

Committee: House Families & Children

Transcript Highlights:

• This has provoked calls for reform and more thoughtful oversight of pesticide use.
• Reform also addressed various inefficiencies and deficits that the department faced.
• I am with California Surpassive Reform.
• DPR has additional resources and has put internal reforms in place.
• We need DPR reform.

Summary: The joint Assembly and Senate hearing examined whether California’s pesticide program is meeting its public-protection goals, with opening remarks from committee chairs emphasizing the state’s large pesticide use, the need to transition toward sustainable pest management, and ongoing oversight including a state audit of DPR and county agricultural commissioner enforcement. The hearing also referenced recent concerns in Ladera Ranch about childhood cancer cases and the need for transparent investigation and community access to information. Panel one focused on human health and the regulatory framework. Dr. Anna Maria Mora described long-running CHAMACOS research showing widespread pesticide exposure in farmworker families, links to neurodevelopmental, respiratory, liver, and cardiometabolic harms, and greater impacts on children facing social adversity. She urged biomonitoring, better linkage of exposure data to health outcomes, regulation of chemical classes and mixtures, stronger buffers around homes and schools, and more community-based research. Professor Tim Malloy explained California’s two-tier system of DPR registration and county permitting, said the state’s program is strong but falls short on cumulative exposure analysis and alternatives assessment, and argued that DPR and counties need better tools, training, and funding to implement legally required protections. Committee members asked about biomonitoring, class-based regulation, and how to make pesticide data more usable for the public. Panel two brought testimony from environmental justice and farmworker advocates, who argued that California remains behind other jurisdictions by allowing highly hazardous pesticides, including 1,3-dichloropropene and paraquat, and by relying on a funding structure tied to pesticide sales. Witnesses said DPR often moves too slowly on reevaluations, rarely assesses combined exposures, and does not adequately account for health, environmental, and social costs or conflicts of interest involving pest control advisors. They also described inconsistent county-level implementation, weak outreach, and confusion over whether DPR or county agricultural commissioners are responsible for enforcement, and urged faster phaseouts, tiered fees, stronger local protections, and clearer accountability. Panel three represented regulated entities and agricultural stakeholders, who supported the goals of safer pest management but stressed that California’s registration process must be more predictable, transparent, and timely. They said AB 2113’s staffing and timeline reforms were important, but backlog and delays still hinder access to newer, lower-risk products and can hurt both consumer and agricultural uses. Agricultural witnesses also emphasized the need to invest more in pest prevention, invasive species detection, extension support, farmer training, and practical incentives for sustainable pest management. No votes were taken; the hearing was informational, with members pressing witnesses on timelines, implementation, funding, and the division of responsibility between DPR and county agencies.

Transcript Highlights:

• And with a very small budget and all volunteers, we've trained thousands.
• Recently, in the state budget, 11% of family stabilization was cut from the DCF budget, along with 7%
• of the residential care budget.
• It more recently in the state budget 11% of family stabilization was cut from the DCF budget, along with
• 7% of the residential care budget.

Committee: Joint Joint Committee on Children, Families and Persons with Disabilities

Summary: The Joint Committee on Children, Families, and Persons with Disabilities held a hybrid hearing on a series of child welfare bills focused on DCF, foster care, mandated reporting, educational records, and family support. Chair Kennedy and Chair Livingstone opened with accessibility and testimony rules, then heard testimony on bills including S.127 on expanding mandated reporters, S.107/H.235 on a Foster Children’s Bill of Rights, S.106/H.228 on transferring foster care review from DCF to the Office of the Child Advocate, H.258/S.125 on an electronic backpack for foster children’s educational records, H.205 on kinship foster care background checks, H.246/H.266 on minimizing trauma in care and protection cases, and S.159 on support for families after sudden unexpected infant death. Supporters of the mandated reporter bill, led by Sen. Feeney and Foxborough advocates, described a local model that trains all adults who work with children and argued the state should scale that approach statewide to improve recognition and reporting of abuse. Testimony on the foster care bills emphasized the need for clearer rights, better notice to children and attorneys, stronger remedies, and independent oversight. Advocates, youth with lived experience, and legal organizations described placement instability, delayed notifications, abuse in care, poor educational continuity, and the need for rights around safety, family contact, culture, language, and access to records. Several witnesses urged that the Foster Children’s Bill of Rights include enforceable court remedies, not just reporting requirements. On the oversight bill, supporters argued DCF should not review its own foster care system and pointed to poor outcomes, high placement instability, and recent investigative reporting as evidence for moving review responsibilities to the Office of the Child Advocate. On the electronic backpack bill, testimony focused on the need for real-time data sharing and a centralized system so schools can receive foster students’ records quickly and support continuity. On the trauma-minimization bill, Rep. Miskin framed the proposal as a set of practical changes to reduce harm during removals and court involvement. On the SUID bill, Sen. Lovely said families should be given information about available grief and support resources after an infant death. No votes were taken during the hearing; the committee primarily received testimony and questions.