Transcript Highlights:

• Andy Toulon, Budget Coordinator for the House Operating Budget Committee.
• The 25-27 biennial budget and the 26 supplemental budget.
• Again, the governor's budget each January and the enacted budget 30 days after that budget is enacted
• Again, the governor's budget each January and the enacted budget 30 days after that budget is enacted
• budget requirement.

Committee: Joint Joint Legislative-Executive Committee on Budget Transparency and Fiscal Sustainability

Transcript Highlights:

• budgets.
• So if there's any supplemental budgets, like in the Medicaid budget this year, or any budget enhancements
• We have our budget team who puts the budgets together.
• Reflected in that budget.
• to balance this budget.

Summary: The Joint Finance-Appropriations Committee opened the session with roll call, confirmed a quorum, and introduced new members, staff, and pages. Co-chairs and staff then reviewed JFAC’s role as the legislature’s main budget committee, the committee’s daily schedule, and the resources available through legislative staff, the impact team, and the newly released 2026 Legislative Budget Book and related budget tools. The committee received a detailed briefing from the Division of Financial Management on the JFAC calendar and then from Governor’s Budget Director Lori Wolf on the governor’s FY 2026 and FY 2027 budget recommendations. Wolf said the budget is balanced but tight, relying on a mix of ongoing reductions and one-time actions rather than reserve fund transfers. Major budget actions included a 3% ongoing reduction across most state agencies, reversions of certain one-time balances to the general fund, no recommended pay increase for state employees or teachers, and higher employee health insurance costs. The budget also proposed reductions or policy changes in Medicaid, virtual school funding, Idaho Digital Learning Academy, and some transportation and water-related funds, while preserving funding for public safety, education, water, and transportation priorities. Members questioned the assumptions behind the budget, especially the projected ending balances, the use of one-time transfers, the impact of rising health insurance costs on employees, the effect of Medicaid cuts on services and cost shifts, and the rationale for reductions to online education and IDLA. Several members also asked about the proposed federal tax conformity changes, including the timing of implementation and the treatment of Idaho’s existing R&E tax credit. Wolf said the conformity estimate was based on Tax Commission analysis and that the administration was not recommending use of the budget stabilization fund. No votes or formal actions were taken; the committee concluded by noting that the Economic Outlook Committee would meet later in the week and that JFAC would continue budget hearings the next day.

Transcript Highlights:

• This is our 2026 Budget Act.
• budget is unsustainable.
• budget from this body, the worst part of this budget?
• And there's a lot in this budget: budget for veterans, budget for our labor community.
• Whether you agree with this budget or you don't agree with this budget, if you see a budget staffer,

Transcript Highlights:

• When I sent budget instructions to agencies for their agency decision package budget request back in
• This budget makes appropriations from the budget stabilization account.
• This budget makes appropriations from the budget stabilization account.
• And this budget does not fully.
• budget from last session.

Bills: SB5998

Committee: Senate Ways & Means

Keywords: fiscal appropriations, budget, state funding, financial management, operating expenses

Transcript Highlights:

• This budget makes appropriations from the budget stabilization account.
• This budget makes appropriations from the budget stabilization account.
• budget from last session.
• budget from last session.
• . ...in this budget.

Summary: The Senate Ways and Means Committee heard an overview from OFM Director Katie Chapman See on Governor Ferguson’s 2026 supplemental budget proposal. She said the budget was built in response to higher caseloads and inflation, a roughly $390 million revenue forecast drop, new federal costs tied to H.R. 1, and a relatively small ending fund balance. The proposal would increase near general fund spending by about $1.1 billion and solve an estimated $2.3 billion two-year gap through about $800 million in reductions, revenue shifts and tax preference changes, use of other funds, and about $1 billion from the budget stabilization account. She also noted the budget is balanced over two years but not fully over four years under the state’s outlook rules. Chapman See highlighted reductions in Working Connections Child Care, including a soft cap on enrollment and holding subsidy rates at the 75th percentile, delays to long-term care and developmental disability-related changes, and across-the-board reductions to higher education and administrative spending. She also described investments in wildfire suppression and preparedness, affordability programs like utility rebates and home energy assistance, housing-related planning and permitting support, One Washington IT replacement, behavioral health workforce programs, and continued support for some K-12 initiatives such as ninth grade success and homeless student stability. In response to questions, she said some proposed cuts were based on the governor’s subjective judgment about what was critically necessary, that current child care enrollees would not be cut off immediately, and that the budget would maintain services for about 500 highest-acuity Medicaid clients who lost eligibility under federal changes. Public testimony was largely critical of the proposed cuts in K-12, early learning, and higher education. School officials, educators, nurses, and advocacy groups opposed reductions to Transition to Kindergarten, Local Effort Assistance, Running Start, MSOC, school leadership and support grants, and higher education funding, arguing the cuts would worsen existing funding gaps and harm student outcomes. Several witnesses supported restoring or maintaining funding for ninth grade success, Treehouse’s foster youth graduation program, homeless student stability, and Science on Wheels. In early learning, child care providers and advocates opposed the Working Connections cap and subsidy-rate reduction, warning it would reduce access and destabilize providers. In higher education, campus leaders and labor representatives opposed across-the-board cuts and fund shifts, while some institutions and advocates supported targeted investments such as behavioral health workforce programs and DigiPen aid restoration. In human services, Planned Parenthood advocates praised restored abortion access funding and Medicaid reimbursements. The committee took no votes or final action in the transcript provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• 2025 Budget Act.
• This is my third year on budget and my last budget hearing.
• Many, many items in our budgets... ...policy affects our budget.
• budget cycles.
• budget staff for guiding us through this difficult budget process.

Committee: House Budget

Transcript Highlights:

• We now project $16.5 billion higher revenues over the budget window when compared to the 2024 Budget
• That said, the Governor's budget builds off the 2024 Budget Act framework.
• , a fiscally balanced budget.
• balanced budget.
• budget.

Committee: House Budget

Transcript Highlights:

• In this budget, the staff and the budget chairs have done a yeoman's job.
• It's not a perfect budget, but it's a good budget. Thank you. Thank you, Assembly Member Gibson.
• In this budget, the staff and the budget chairs have done a yeoman's job.
• The number one principle of putting a budget together, whether it's a household budget, a budget for
• And so this is not a perfect budget. I don't believe that anyone could craft a perfect budget.

Summary: The Assembly convened after a quorum call and proceeded to floor business, with the main item being SB 101, the state budget bill. Before debate on the bill, Assembly Member Sanchez offered amendments to redirect funding toward Proposition 36 implementation, wildfire prevention, Medi-Cal provider reimbursement, developmental services, and other priorities; the majority moved to lay those amendments on the table, and the motion passed 43-18. The chamber then took up SB 101 as the budget bill for immediate effect. Debate on the budget was extensive and sharply divided. Supporters, including Assembly Member Gabriel and several committee chairs, described the budget as a difficult but responsible compromise that protects Medi-Cal, IHSS, child care, housing, wildfire prevention, and other safety-net programs while responding to a projected deficit and federal uncertainty. Opponents criticized the budget as fiscally unsound and argued it relied on accounting gimmicks, did not adequately fund Proposition 36 or wildfire prevention, and continued spending on high-speed rail and Medi-Cal coverage for undocumented immigrants. Several members also raised concerns about gas taxes, provider reimbursement, probation funding, and the impact on vulnerable Californians. After debate, the Assembly voted on SB 101 and passed it 57-19. The measure was sent immediately to the Senate. The body then announced upcoming session schedules, with no floor or check-in sessions on June 14 and 15, and a floor session set for June 16 at 1 p.m., before adjourning.

Transcript Highlights:

• for multiple budgets.
• Let's talk a little bit about the big picture view of the general fund budget and the state budget for
• That level of budgeted amount.
• the budget by specific category.
• to your budget.

Committee: Senate Local Government and Taxation

Transcript Highlights:

• , transportation budget, or general fund budget, is really high already. ...capital budget, transportation
• budget, or general fund budget is really high already.
• , transportation budget, or general fund budget, is really high already. capital budget, transportation
• budget, or general fund budget is really high already.
• , not the entire budget.

Bills: SB6003

Committee: Senate Ways & Means

Keywords: capital budget, funding, infrastructure, state projects, budget allocation

Transcript Highlights:

• So we appreciate the opportunity to comment on this budget. ...budget act.
• Then we pass our version of the budget, and we say, here's a budget we really like.
• This budget reflects that.
• . ...budget one that I'm in.
• Please keep this in the budget. We also $30,000. Please keep this in the budget.

Committee: Senate Budget and Fiscal Review

Transcript Highlights:

• The rest of the budget is almost verbatim basic budget. Yes, ma'am.
• FY 2027 budget.
• budget, please.
• voted for that budget. ...opposing this budget here today, they voted for that budget.
• budget.

Bills: HB4138 , HB4139 , HB4140 , HB4141 , HB4142 , HB4143 , HB4144 , HB4145 , HB4146 , HB4147 , HB4148 , HB4149 , HB4150 , HB4151 , HB4152 , HB4153 , SB1831 , SB1832 , SB1833 , SB1834 , SB1835 , SB1836 , SB1837 , SB1838 , SB1839 , SB1840 , SB1841 , SB1842 , SB1843 , SB1844 , SB1845 , SB1846

Committee: Joint Appropriations

Keywords: appropriations, education funding, health care, general fund, state budget, local funding, gaming, pari-mutuel, horse racing, regulatory assessment, first-time starters, budget implementation, federal funds, government services, budget stabilization, financial reporting, capital outlay, infrastructure, veterans services, highway construction

Transcript Highlights:

• And it's true that budgets do reflect our values, and this budget values Californians.
• It's not in this budget.
• In this budget, the staff and the budget chairs have done a yeoman's job.
• It's not a perfect budget, but it's a good budget. Thank you. Thank you.
• That's not good budgeting.

Transcript Highlights:

• And this budget assumes $395 million in new NGFO resources to the operating budget from capital gains
• of $3.6 billion in total budgeted increases and $1.1 billion in total budgeted decreases.
• of $3.6 billion in total budgeted increases and $1.1 billion in total budgeted decreases.
• As you do your final budget reconciliation, we ask that we remain in the budget at this level.
• last year's budget.

Summary: The House Appropriations Committee held a public hearing on proposed substitute House Bill 2289, the House operating budget. Budget staff Mary Monroe gave a detailed overview of the proposal’s near general fund outlook, reserve levels, major revenue assumptions, and major spending and savings items. She highlighted assumed revenue from capital gains and a proposed “millionaires tax,” a transfer from the budget stabilization account, administrative reductions across agencies, and several major policy shifts, including changes affecting Working Connections Child Care, K-12 education, higher education, long-term care, behavioral health, wildfire response, and state employee compensation. Members then asked questions, including about the higher education building account/operating fee swap and its interaction with the capital budget and Climate Commitment Act funds. The committee also announced amendment deadlines for the budget process. The bulk of the meeting was public testimony, with many speakers generally supporting or opposing specific parts of the budget. Supportive testimony praised funding for wildfire prevention, public health, reproductive health, civil legal aid, the Poison Center, some higher education institutions, and certain disability and child welfare services. Many speakers urged restoration or protection of funding for K-12 education, especially transition to kindergarten, local effort assistance, bus depreciation, and Running Start; others opposed cuts to child care, early learning, public defense, long-term care, adult day and home care services, occupational/physical/speech therapy for Medicaid patients, and community and technical colleges. Several local government, health, and nonprofit representatives also asked the committee to preserve public works, homelessness, energy assistance, environmental justice, and recovery/diversion programs, while some business and public safety groups sought continued funding for organized retail crime prevention and related initiatives. No votes were taken during the hearing. The committee recessed briefly and later resumed with virtual testimony, where additional witnesses repeated concerns about education cuts, long-term care, health care access, disability services, dispute resolution, early childhood programs, and the need for ongoing or increased funding in those areas.

Transcript Highlights:

• This budget assumes the revenue.
• Then we pass our version of the budget, and we say, here's a budget we really like.
• This budget reflects that.
• . ...budget one that I'm in.
• Please keep this in the budget. We also $30,000. Please keep this in the budget.

Summary: The Senate Budget and Fiscal Review Committee heard AB 109, the Budget Act of 2026, as the main item. Committee leaders described the legislative budget agreement as a balanced two-year plan with about $355.9 billion in total spending, $253 billion from the General Fund, and $36.5 billion in reserves. The Legislative Analyst and Department of Finance said the package assumes about $5.5 billion in higher revenues than the May Revision and uses those resources for a mix of spending changes, including higher Proposition 98 support, additional child care slots, housing and homelessness funding, delayed Medi-Cal reductions, and added support for counties, public hospitals, and distressed hospitals. The administration said the plan resembles the May Revision’s overall structure but includes new spending and revenue assumptions, and members noted that separate revenue trailer bills would be heard later in the week. Much of the committee discussion focused on Medi-Cal, H.R. 1, and the impact on immigrants, low-income workers, counties, and hospitals. Several senators criticized the budget for locking in savings from delayed or reduced Medi-Cal coverage and for not including a mechanism to restore eligibility, while administration and LAO staff said the package delays some reductions but does not automatically reinstate coverage. Finance staff said roughly 1.5 million to 2 million people with unsatisfactory immigration status would move from managed care to fee-for-service, with coverage largely unchanged except for certain services not federally allowed. Members also discussed county administrative funding, indigent care, public hospital support, and the expected rise in uncompensated care. Other topics included In-Home Supportive Services, child care, homelessness funding, Prop. 36, courthouse construction and new judgeships, transit and cap-and-invest/GGRF funding, local journalism, and workforce or reentry programs. Committee members split along party lines in their comments. Democratic members generally supported the agreement as a difficult but responsible compromise that protects core services, preserves reserves, and makes targeted investments in education, housing, health care, and justice system capacity. Republican members argued the budget relies on unrealistic revenue assumptions, does not sufficiently reduce spending, and includes costly policy choices and tax increases. Public testimony largely came from advocates and stakeholders who supported IHSS, Medi-Cal, child care, domestic violence services, hospitals, transit, and other programs, while some business and health plan representatives raised concerns about tax proposals and the shift from managed care to fee-for-service. The chair then moved the committee to public comment and indicated that the revenue bills would return later in the week; no final vote on AB 109 is reflected in the portion provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• While this budget isn't perfect, and no budget ever is, this budget delivers for hardworking Arizonans
• year's budget.
• I also note that in the May budget, that was a Republican-only budget...
• budget.
• tax cut budget.

Bills: HB4154 , HB4155 , HB4156 , HB4157 , HB4158 , HB4159 , HB4160 , HB4161 , HB4162 , HB4163 , HB4164 , HB4165 , HB4166 , HB4167 , HB4168 , HB4169 , SB1847 , SB1848 , SB1849 , SB1850 , SB1851 , SB1852 , SB1853 , SB1854 , SB1855 , SB1856 , SB1857 , SB1858 , SB1859 , SB1860 , SB1861 , SB1862

Committee: Joint Appropriations

Keywords: HB4155, amusements, amusement industry, entertainment, recreation, state appropriations, biennium, 2026-2027, fees, licensing, regulation, tourism, parks, fairgrounds, carnivals, arcades, HB4156, capital outlay, appropriations, capital projects

Transcript Highlights:

• This budget assumes $395 million in new NGFO resources to the operating budget from capital gains.
• of $3.6 billion in total budgeted increases and $1.1 billion in total budgeted decreases.
• of $3.6 billion in total budgeted increases and $1.1 billion in total budgeted decreases.
• As you do your final budget reconciliation, we ask that we remain in the budget at this level.
• last year's budget.

Bills: HB2289

Committee: House Appropriations

Keywords: appropriations, budget, fiscal matters, state spending, general fund, supplemental budget, biennial budget, substitute bill, public defense, civil legal aid, courts, judicial branch, homelessness, supportive housing, affordable housing, behavioral health, juvenile rehabilitation, youth services, child welfare, foster care

Transcript Highlights:

• So SB 111 is the budget bill junior to the 2026 Budget Act.
• This budget provides changes to AB 109, the Legislature's budget adopted earlier this month.
• And I am grateful for this budget.
• Well, we're viewing the budget.
• And this budget and the sustainability of this budget confirms that.

Summary: The Assembly Budget Committee met to consider the final three-party agreement for the 2026-27 state budget and 19 implementing bills, including two budget bill juniors and 17 trailer bills. Committee leadership and administration officials described the budget as a balanced plan that reduces out-year structural deficits, maintains large reserves, and makes major investments in health care, education, housing, child care, public safety, and other core services while also responding to expected federal cuts and fiscal uncertainty. The Department of Finance outlined the package’s major components, including Medi-Cal adjustments, education funding increases, higher education changes, child care and human services updates, housing and homelessness funding, energy and transportation provisions, and tax and general government changes. Members asked questions about several provisions, including CSU enrollment targets and turnaround plans, the Prop. 98 settle-up mechanism, the plastics market development payment program, housing accountability measures, NextGen 9-1-1 implementation, and veteran services. Staff and administration witnesses explained that the higher education language is intended to improve campus-by-campus reporting and oversight, that Prop. 98 settle-up would be finalized later through the statutory certification process, and that NextGen 9-1-1 now includes one-time funding, quarterly reporting, an independent technical review, and a state audit. Members also discussed the HAP homelessness funding increase to $900 million and the balance between accountability and timely distribution of funds. The most extended exchange centered on comparisons between funding for veterans and Medi-Cal/immigrant health coverage. Republican members argued the budget spends far more on undocumented immigrant services than on veterans, while Democratic members and Finance staff responded that the comparison was misleading because many veterans’ services are federally funded and the state budget also includes dedicated veteran support. The chair and other members emphasized that the budget reflects difficult tradeoffs and that the package protects vulnerable populations, preserves health care access, and advances affordability. No final vote was described in the excerpt, but members indicated support for the overall package and said they would support it on the floor.

Transcript Highlights:

• But there's also a much larger budget.
• So if the general fund budget is currently at $5.6 billion, the total budget for fiscal year 2026 is
• has control over the budget.
• Maintenance budgets.
• It— Budget submissions and then the governor's recommended budget.

Summary: The committee received a broad budget overview from Legislative Services staff on the state’s fiscal position, focusing on the general fund, structural balance, cash reconciliation, and the governor’s budget recommendations for fiscal years 2026 and 2027. Staff explained that projected revenues are below the current budgeted level, creating a need for either budget reductions or the use of cash balances and reserve funds to maintain balance. They reviewed major drivers of spending growth over recent years, including Medicaid expansion, public schools, the State Public Defender, IT services, and water resources, and noted that these statutory and ongoing obligations are crowding out other spending. Members also discussed the governor’s proposed use of interest earnings and reserve balances from several funds, the Budget Stabilization Fund cap, and the policy question of whether changes to fund interest allocations would require legislation or could be handled through appropriation language. The committee also reviewed current-year adjustments, including supplementals, rescissions, deficiency warrants, and the governor’s proposed holdbacks. Specific items discussed included public school enrollment adjustments, the proposed rescission of Empowering Parents funding, Medicaid growth and provider rate changes, Department of Corrections costs tied to inmate placement and medical services, invasive species treatment funding, and a possible tax conformity impact tied to federal law changes. Members asked about fire suppression deficiency funding, the use of reserve balances, and the difference between current-law and governor-recommended spending levels. Staff emphasized that the governor’s budget relies on short-term money and reserve transfers to smooth the current deficit, while the legislature must decide whether to follow that approach or make deeper structural changes. Later, staff provided an overview of the budget hearing process and the Legislative Budget Book, explaining the standard reports, agency organization charts, fund analyses, performance measures, and five-year snapshots that committees will use during hearings. Another presentation clarified the difference between deficiency warrants and supplemental appropriations, noting that deficiency warrants cover certain last-year expenses authorized by statute, while supplementals adjust the current-year appropriation and can apply to general, dedicated, or federal funds. The committee then heard a detailed presentation on state health insurance costs, including rising medical claims, reserve balances, the 80/20 employee-employer cost split, and projected FY 2027 premium increases. Members asked about school district participation in the state plan, the role of the insurance carrier contract, and whether broader participation could lower costs. No votes were taken during the meeting, and the committee adjourned after the presentations and questions.

Transcript Highlights:

• budget more than having them.
• So SB 111 is the budget bill junior to the 2026 Budget Act.
• This budget provides changes to AB 109, the Legislature's budget adopted earlier this month.
• Well, we're viewing the budget.
• And this budget and the sustainability of this budget confirms that.

Committee: House Budget