Transcript Highlights:

• But, you know, we're kind of drilling down into the budget section of this and what that additional budget
• Drilling down into the budget section of this and what that additional budget looks like, those requests
• </c> budget request that we've set forward. budget request that we've set forward.
• </c> cost for this budget. cost for this budget.
• </c> of your budget information and so on. of your budget information and so on.

Summary: The committee first approved the minutes, then heard a lengthy presentation from the Department for Public Health on Kentucky’s rural health transformation plan and related budget questions. Commissioner John Langfeld said the state received a $212.9 million federal award, one of the larger awards nationally, and outlined five focus areas: maternal and infant health, integrated EMS/trauma response, behavioral health and substance use disorder, oral health, and chronic disease prevention with an emphasis on obesity and diabetes. He stressed that the effort is intended to be integrated, data-driven, and sustainable, and that the federal funds cannot be used for new construction, clinician salaries, research and development, EHR replacement, or to pay for currently billable services. He also said the program carries accountability requirements and that funds can be clawed back if milestones are not met. Members pressed for clarification on duplication with other budget requests, sustainability after the five-year funding period, and how success would be measured. Langfeld said he was not aware of any duplicate funding with the department’s additional budget requests and said the rural health funds were separate from those requests. He also said the program will be tracked through specific metrics and timelines, using both execution measures and outcome measures such as readmissions, with more rapid-cycle feedback to allow course correction. Representative Fleming raised concerns about possible overlap with navigator funding and asked for more detail on the budget breakdown; Langfeld said a detailed line-item budget had been prepared but was still awaiting final CMS approval before release, and that he would explore sharing more information once restrictions were lifted. The committee then heard from the Kentucky State Public Health Laboratory about a request for a new central lab expansion. The presenter described the current 35-year-old facility as outdated and constrained by aging infrastructure, obsolete equipment, deferred maintenance, and inadequate space, and said the lab performs critical work with no in-state alternative for many services, including newborn screening, select-agent and biosafety level 3 testing, animal necropsy for rabies, genetic sequencing, environmental and food safety testing, and response to emerging infectious diseases. The project is already in design phase C, expected to finish in mid-April, with construction funding sought at roughly $276 million on top of about $35 million already approved for design. Members asked about long-term operating costs, backup arrangements, and whether the current facility would remain in use; the presenter said the current lab would continue to be used by the department while other divisions move into vacated space, and that the lab has mutual-aid agreements with the Southeast Consortium and universities for contingency support. Finally, the Department for Community Based Services began its budget presentation on SNAP and relative caregiver issues. Commissioner Lisa Dennis and budget director Misty Sammons identified the governor’s recommended budget items tied to new federal requirements under HR1, including changes affecting payment error rates. The discussion was just beginning when the transcript ended.

Transcript Highlights:

• It's a difficult<00:05:04.320><c> budget</c><00:05:04.720><c> to</c> difficult budget to difficult budget
• This budget is a challenge.
• This budget is a challenge.
• This budget is a challenge.
• This budget is a challenge.

Bills: HF2434

Committee: House Human Services Finance and Policy

Transcript Highlights:

• We're not a budget-setting committee.
• branch budget.
• We're not a budget setting committee.
• We understand the budget limitations and the need to balance your budget, and even though this isn't
• We understand the budget limitations and the need to balance your budget, and even though this isn't

Committee: House Revenue and Taxation

Transcript Highlights:

• </c> budget resolution labeled BUD S02. budget resolution labeled BUD S02.
• </c> budget resolution. budget resolution.
• </c> aside from the uh finance budget bills. aside from the uh finance budget bills.
• </c> Bud Res 2, the House budget resolution. Bud Res 2, the House budget resolution.
• The budget resolution is Thank you. The budget resolution is passed. passed. passed.

Bills: HF601

Committee: House Ways and Means

Transcript Highlights:

• In a year when we are facing not even an efficiency budget but a starvation budget, when every agency
• budget but a starvation<01:18:54.560><c> budget</c><01:18:55.040><c> when</c><01:18:55.280><c> every
• ,</c> to do the uh 20 22 million per budget, to do the uh 20 22 million per budget, right?
• So, I appreciate their work. into their budget cycle. And uh and into their budget cycle.
• , what's our budget?

Summary: The committee first considered House Bill 66, a right-to-know measure that would broaden access from “citizen” to “person,” including out-of-state requesters. Members also adopted an amendment removing the current no-filing-fee provision for appeals of unfavorable right-to-know ombudsman rulings, citing budget concerns. The bill was then reported ought to pass as amended on a 16-9 vote, with a minority report requested. House Bill 187, which would let a parent or guardian seek a protective order on behalf of a minor alleging abuse by someone outside the family or household, was described as a narrow fix with little fiscal impact. It passed unanimously, 25-0, and was placed on the consent calendar. House Bill 215, requiring landfill permit applicants to submit a report on potential harms and benefits, was retained because its policy had been folded into House Bill 2; the committee voted 25-0 to retain it. House Bill 219, dealing with renewable portfolio standard changes and lower renewable energy certificate values, drew opposition from members who said it would weaken renewable energy development and raise concerns about energy costs, but the motion to retain was adopted 14-11, allowing the bill to be moved into House Bill 2. The committee then retained House Bills 365, 552, 566, 572, 607, 611, and 624, all by unanimous or near-unanimous votes, generally because the relevant policy or funding had been incorporated into House Bill 2 or because the bills were viewed as technical or low-impact. HB 566 was described as a landfill leach-management bill with a fiscal note under $10,000 annually and was sent to consent. HB 572 and HB 607 were retained because their money components were moved into HB 2, though one member objected that HB 607 represented an unfunded mandate for the Hampton Beach Area Commission. House Bill 511, concerning ICE detainers and county detention practices, generated the most debate. Supporters said the amendment clarified how long counties may hold detainees without a federal contract and compared the detention period to existing bail rules; opponents argued the bill could sanction detention of people not charged with crimes and raised due-process concerns. The committee adopted the amendment 14-11 and then reported the bill ought to pass as amended on another 14-11 vote, with a minority report requested. House Bill 639, involving securities and digital currency issues, was also reported ought to pass after members noted unresolved concerns but said the Secretary of State’s Securities Division was willing to continue working on it in the other body; the vote was 16-10.

Transcript Highlights:

• side of this budget.
• I'm fine doing this in the OMB budget. I'm fine doing this in the OMB budget.
• in balance so that you're not having one budget 30% and one budget 10%.
• 30% and one budget 10%.
• No, but I mean half of our budget. Oh, more than half of the budget is federal funds.

Bills: SB2399

Committee: Senate Appropriations - Human Resources Division

Summary: The Senate Appropriations HR Division met to work through amendments and budget items in House Bill 2012/HB 1004, focusing first on long-term care, disability services, and behavioral health. Members discussed competing approaches to a four-plex for medically complex individuals, a value-based care payment withhold for nursing facilities, accreditation requirements for providers, a study of developmental disability services, and funding for Family Voices and Ann Carlson-related services. Several amendments were accepted or set aside after discussion, including a study amendment for disability services and a Family Voices grant amendment that was adjusted to remove “one-time” language so it could continue as an ongoing grant. The committee also agreed to keep or defer some items for conference committee, including the youth crisis stabilization pilot and other long-term care proposals. A major discussion centered on the state hospital project. Members debated whether the $330 million project should remain in the DHS budget or be moved to the OMB budget for construction management. After discussion of costs, alternates, and the role of a steering committee and BND loan language, the committee agreed to remove the state hospital funding and related loan language from the DHS budget while leaving the steering committee language in place. The committee also considered a proposed Altru grant for additional beds and settled on a smaller planning-focused approach, with a $1 million grant and a line of credit concept to be refined later. The committee then turned to behavioral health items, including QRTP funding, nursing home behavioral health training, and a youth crisis stabilization pilot. Members generally supported keeping the QRTP funding level, but were divided on the nursing home behavioral health training and the crisis stabilization pilot, with some preferring to leave those issues for conference committee. The division also reviewed the HHS block grant and underfunding structure, with Donna Ackland explaining salary, vacancy, and flexibility calculations; the committee discussed adjusting the underfund and revenue assumptions but did not finalize every number before moving on. Finally, the committee took up House Bill 1577 on wastewater treatment grants. Senator Davison moved to hoghouse the bill into a study-focused version using the proposed amendment language, and the motion passed. The committee then moved HB 1577 as amended with a do pass recommendation; the roll call passed with Senators Cleary, Davison, Dever, and Mathern voting yes, and Senator Magrum not recorded as voting. The meeting adjourned with plans to return later in the day to continue budget work.

Transcript Highlights:

• Today, we will hear an early action bill, Assembly Bill 106, a budget bill junior amending the 2025 Budget
• And then let me add An action with regard to the budget.
• that amends the 2025 Budget Act, as was stated.
• Now, a budget is a statement.
• And in the current budget and the proposal for the upcoming budget, a goose egg well describes the amount

Summary: The Senate Budget and Fiscal Review Committee heard AB 106, an early-action budget bill providing $90 million one-time General Fund to support reproductive health providers affected by the federal H.R. 1 Medicaid funding prohibition. Department of Finance staff explained that the money would be administered as grants by the Department of Health Care Access and Information because affected providers can no longer bill Medi-Cal during the federal restriction, which runs through July 4, 2026. The Legislative Analyst’s Office had no additional comments. Members also discussed related budget context, including the broader estimated loss to California providers, the use of grant funding rather than loans, and provisions exempting some contract and records information from public disclosure. Committee debate focused on whether the funding was an appropriate priority amid other budget pressures. Supporters argued the bill is an emergency response to a targeted federal attack on Planned Parenthood and other family planning providers, emphasizing that the clinics provide broader primary care services such as cancer screenings, STI testing, contraception, and prenatal care, and that the funding is not for abortion services because federal Medicaid dollars cannot be used for abortion. Opponents questioned the size of the appropriation, the use of General Fund dollars, the transparency exemptions, and why similar aid was not being directed to rural hospitals, disability services, Proposition 36, or other budget needs. Public testimony was overwhelmingly in support from reproductive health, medical, and health equity organizations, with some unrelated comments urging funding for dental care, disability services, housing, and county health systems. After public comment, the committee voted on AB 106 and passed it on a 12-4 vote. The bill was reported out of committee.

Transcript Highlights:

• A few budget-neutral items in the governor’s budget: one is around the State Medical Review Team, or
• A few budget-neutral items in the governor’s budget: one is around the State Medical Review Team, or
• , it's 25.7% of the full budget.
• budget proposals?
• budget proposals?

Committee: Senate Human Services

Transcript Highlights:

• Colleen Gill with the Office of Planning and Budget.
• and the non-discretionary adjusted standstill budget.
• the non-discretionary adjusted standstill budget.
• It's a total increase of 2.8% to LDH's budget.
• But the budget number is significant, correct?

Summary: The committee first took up the fiscal status statement, certification of the state surplus, and the five-year baseline budget. Officials from the Office of Planning and Budget and the Division of Administration said the January fiscal status statement had no changes, and the commissioner certified a surplus of $577,073,871. They also reviewed the baseline outlook, noting projected imbalances in later years driven by declining revenue, including the redirection of motor vehicle sales tax, and rising costs such as inflation and Medicaid-related expenses. The fiscal status statement was approved without objection. The governor’s executive budget was then presented as a third consecutive standstill budget, with administration officials emphasizing efficiency savings, no reduction in services, and no reduction in state workforce. They said the budget relies on prior savings efforts and incorporates agency-level cuts and reorganization, while also addressing higher costs in corrections, DCFS, and health care. Major items highlighted included funding for LA GATOR, the high-impact jobs program, DCFS modernization, corrections population and overtime needs, nursing home and managed care adjustments at LDH, and additional support for the MJ Foster Scholarship Program. Members asked about the impact of inflation, the use of federal versus state funds, the future of voucher and GATOR funding, and whether more support should go to DCFS and the Hero Fund. The committee also received the calculation of the FY27 expenditure limit, set at $20.1 billion, and the annual comprehensive financial report for FY2025, which received a clean audit opinion. Members approved a BA-7 increasing federal funds for an executive office transportation grant, approved additions to the Act 751 higher education deferred maintenance project list and a Baton Rouge Community College project combination, and approved contract amendments for CPRA with Coastal Estuary Services and Access Sciences. The committee also corrected a legislative intent item naming the New Orleans Recreational Development Foundation. Finally, the judiciary presented a weighted caseload study for district and appellate courts, explaining it as an updated tool to assess judicial workload and potential judgeship needs; members discussed its limits, the role of specialty courts and commissioners, and the need for further legislative-judicial collaboration before any changes are made.

Transcript Highlights:

• discussions and come out with a fine budget.
• The budget from the Governor was $260 billion.
• We've done that in the past in our budgets.
• OUR BUDGETS.
• These are some of the changes in an enacted budget.

Summary: The Education Budget Conference Joint Committee met on March 18 to begin negotiations on the state education budget. Co-chairs Senator Shelley Mayer and Assembly Member Benedetto outlined their chambers’ priorities, with the Senate emphasizing Foundation Aid changes to better support students experiencing homelessness or foster care, English language learners, a minimum 2% increase for all districts, expanded universal pre-K, and continued support for special education programs and nonpublic schools. The Assembly highlighted its one-house proposal, including a $1.4 billion increase in Foundation Aid, a higher ELL and pupil needs weighting, a new weight for students in foster care or housing instability, removal of the pupil needs cap, $600 million for New York City class size reduction, additional community schools funding, and restorations or increases for libraries, teacher resource centers, 4201 schools, My Brother’s Keeper, and educational television and radio. Members from both chambers offered opening remarks stressing education as a top budget priority and expressing confidence that a compromise could be reached. Senator Tedisco focused on school safety and bullying, arguing that parents should be notified when their children are bullied and citing the need to protect students’ ability to learn. Assembly Member Vanel emphasized education as a tool for economic mobility and called for stronger financial literacy instruction. Assembly Member Carroll supported funding for libraries and evidence-based reading programs, while Assembly Member Smith said the Foundation Aid formula remains outdated and urged more support for English language learners, special education, and community schools. Assembly Member Chludzinski stressed local control, criticized the electric school bus mandate, and called for greater support for libraries and fiscal restraint. No votes were taken. The meeting was an opening conference session, with both sides stating their intent to continue negotiations and work toward an on-time budget that reflects shared priorities for students, schools, and libraries across New York State.

Transcript Highlights:

• to the budget.
• sizable Budget Commission published the long-range financial outlook, which projected sizable budget
• This is the budget request.
• Under this proposed budget, no.
• And I can assure you our budget... I appreciate it.

Summary: The Transportation and Economic Development Budget Subcommittee met to consider its recommended fiscal year 2025-2026 budget and a conforming committee bill. Chair Shove presented an $18.5 billion TED budget, describing it as about 8.5% below the prior year’s TED budget and emphasizing recurring savings, reductions to vacant positions over 90 days old, and a focus on core agency needs. He highlighted funding for economic development, Visit Florida, Space Florida, affordable housing programs, military affairs, libraries, cultural and historic preservation grants, emergency management, and a $14.1 billion transportation work program. The committee then took up PCB TED 2501, which changes documentary stamp tax distributions by redirecting certain revenues to general revenue. The bill would reinstate the general revenue service charge on the supplemental housing-related dock stamp revenue, eliminating a recurring $150 million source for the State Housing Trust Fund, and would also redirect about $466 million from the State Transportation Trust Fund to general revenue. Chair Shove said the measure has no net zero fiscal impact on state revenues and does not alter the longstanding standard dock stamp funding for affordable housing or eliminate FDOT programs, arguing the bill preserves flexibility for future legislatures. Public testimony was split. Representatives from the Florida Transportation Builders Association and the Florida Public Transportation Association warned that the transportation trust fund reduction would significantly affect FDOT’s five-year work program, especially the Strategic Intermodal System, and could reduce planned capacity improvements and transit funding. Several members also raised concerns about the housing-related changes, arguing the bill undercuts commitments made through the Live Local framework and could weaken affordable housing efforts. In closing, Chair Shove defended the bill as a necessary tightening of recurring spending and said existing affordable housing and transportation programs would still be funded through other appropriations. The committee approved PCB TED 2501 on a 10-2 vote and reported it favorably before adjourning.

Transcript Highlights:

• Would be to present a balanced budget to you today.
• Budgeting this year? Yes, we certainly do.
• And so I've been going through the budgets, the budget requests from the agencies and Trying to match
• This is a balanced budget.
• This is a budget that we've worked Extremely hard on 82% of the new spending in this budget is water,

Bills: SB1177

Committee: Senate Joint Committee on Appropriations and Budget

Keywords: education funding, mental health services, public safety, housing, state budget

Transcript Highlights:

• </c> first want to recognize our budget first want to recognize our budget review<00:02:37.680><c> subchairs
• </c> and and move the budget process along. and and move the budget process along.
• </c> I'm going to take note there are multiple budget units where we have removed budget language in
• ’s budget or the cabinet request.
• Uh you can't budget to in our budgets.

Committee: House Appropriations & Revenue

Transcript Highlights:

• How much was budgeted? Let's start with that. 2024-25. How much was budgeted for this program?
• Beginning in the budget year, the Governor’s budget revises the funding methodology in an effort to:
• lower than what was estimated at the Budget Act.
• Are you speaking to the governor's budget? Yes.
• Those deferrals were adopted in the 2025-26 budget and continue to create out-year budget pressure for

Transcript Highlights:

• In addition to ongoing budget cuts and just their proposed budget for this year, at the top line is about
• Not in the budget as it stands.
• I think at our peak, because of a budget that was a multi-year budget a few years ago, there was a total
• They instructed Finance to look at all of the budget items, and so we looked at all of the budget items
• I don't want to leave budget...

Transcript Highlights:

• I know that this budget reflects a decrease in funding to the soldiers' homes and the House 1 budget.
• We have to balance a budget.
• Specific budget items that speak to our budget. thousand four hundred individuals specific budget items
• Governor Healey’s fiscal year 2026 budget proposes a budget of $93.7 million, a $6.8 million increase
• Turning to MCB's fiscal year 26 budget, the budget includes $250,000 to create three new social work

Committee: Joint Joint Committee on Ways and Means

Summary: The hearing opened with remarks from Senate Chair Robyn Kennedy and House Chair Chynah Tyler, who emphasized that the fiscal year 2026 hearing was focused on the Health and Human Services budget, asked members to keep questions budget-related, and noted that no public testimony would be taken. They also highlighted the choice of Doherty Memorial High School as the venue to showcase Worcester’s investment in career and technical education. Committee members then introduced themselves before the first panel, the Executive Office of Veterans Services and the state veterans homes, began testimony. Secretary John Santiago said the governor’s FY26 proposal would support implementation of the HERO Act, which he said is now about 95% implemented, including higher disabled veteran annuities, expanded behavioral health benefits, and other service expansions. He described efforts to reduce veteran homelessness, including nearly $20 million in ARPA-funded housing and outreach initiatives, and said the agency has delivered more than 100,000 supportive services to nearly 8,500 veterans. Leaders from the Chelsea and Holyoke veterans homes reported on staffing, quality measures, electronic medical records, and major construction projects at both facilities, including a new Chelsea campus and the new Holyoke home. Members asked about funding transfers, geographic equity in access to the homes, outreach to women veterans and veterans of color, suicide prevention, Gold Star family support, and the impact of federal uncertainty; Santiago said the homes are now licensed and certified, that the current budget is sufficient, and that the agency is expanding engagement and data collection. The second panel, the Office of the Veteran Advocate, testified that its FY26 request is about $3.3 million, up from the current $2 million, to cover staffing, a larger office, and higher technology costs. Veteran Advocate Bob Notch said the office is a new independent oversight agency created in 2022 to examine systems, coordinate with local veteran service officers, and investigate fatalities or serious harm involving veterans in state care. He said the office’s work depends on research, data, and collaboration with other agencies, and that current funding is only enough for minimum operations. In response to questions, Notch and Deputy Commissioner David O’Callaghan discussed the difficulty of tracking veteran suicides, the need for better data across agencies, and the office’s role as an oversight body rather than a direct service provider. No votes or formal actions were taken during the hearing.

Transcript Highlights:

• Why would we put a specific company in our budget?
• I understand that we don't have budget limits bills yet.
• We do those every year out of the Attorney General's budget.
• This is a balanced budget.
• This is a budget that we've worked extremely hard on. 82% of the new spending in this budget is water

Bills: SB1177

Committee: Senate Joint Committee on Appropriations and Budget

Summary: The Senate Appropriations Committee met to consider Senate Bill 1177, the general appropriation bill. The chair and budget authors explained that the proposal was built to balance the budget using a mix of general revenue, cash sweeps, and other fund transfers, including money from unclaimed property, revenue stabilization, and other statutory funds. Members also discussed a proposed $35 million OWRB revolving loan fund tied to ARPA interest and a $200 million transfer from the Revenue Stabilization Fund to the Taxpayer Endowment Trust Fund as part of a long-term savings strategy. A number of agency-specific items drew questions. Members reviewed the OPEB employer contribution reduction, rent coverage for state agencies, child care and Head Start funding, Department of Corrections revenue from ICE-related agreements, sheriff grant funding, and education funding, including about $99 million in additional formula funding, a $2,000 teacher pay raise, and reading-related appropriations such as Strong Readers and Just Right Reader. The committee also discussed mental health funding, including a $30 million consent decree line, a proposed privatization of CCBHC services with an estimated $10 million savings, and related reduction-in-force costs. Other topics included Attorney General transfers and litigation funding, higher education allocations, Langston University extension funding, historical society requests that were not funded, and a biosolids pilot program. During debate, supporters argued the bill fulfilled the constitutional duty to pass a balanced budget and highlighted increases for education, health care, and water infrastructure. Opponents criticized the use of one-time cash, tax cuts, and what they described as special-project spending, while raising concerns about transparency and underfunded services such as child care and transportation. After debate, the committee voted 18-5 to pass Senate Bill 1177.

Transcript Highlights:

• by that budget are abiding that budget by that budget and<00:21:05.120><c> I'm</c><00:21:05.280><c>
• The budget was removed.
• The budget was removed.
• </c> shaping our budget going forward. shaping our budget going forward.
• . budget. budget.

Committee: Senate Finance

Transcript Highlights:

• The budget change proposal reflected in the Governor's budget provided additional resources for the CWDB
• However, at the Governor's Budget, we were looking in the budget window and the projected fund balance
• So you're budgeting for extra time, so you don't have to come back to this budget. Correct.
• from the 2023 Budget Act.
• from the 2023 Budget Act.

Transcript Highlights:

• ...Is this budgeted budget sufficient to your goal for this year and coming year?
• Well, so the Budget Act of 2012.
• Well, so the budget act of 2012.
• Obviously, the budget can change when you're going to get the budget, but it lays out a plan.
• You know, we have, as was mentioned, the budget has doubled for Cal Fire's budget.