Transcript Highlights:

• Put language in the budget that puts a guaranteed income direct cash payments program in the budget for
• Often on a much more limited budget.
• So under the governor's budget, the total single allocation funding for 2024-25 is held to the Budget
• Last year's budget set the standard.
• In terms of federal funds included in CDSS's budget, the 25-26 governor's budget includes 27.

Transcript Highlights:

• AB 110 is a budget bill junior that amends the 2026 Budget Act to identify budget-related legislation
• It builds out the whole budget architecture; it's a piece of the puzzle to build out the entire budget
• problems with the budget and we dealt with that in the budget, but we also attempted to deal with some
• I appreciate wanting to have a balanced budget, but balancing budgets don't have borrowed money.
• They don't have...” “...budget. But balancing budgets don't have borrowed money.

Summary: The Senate Budget and Fiscal Review subcommittee heard four budget trailer bills: AB 110, AB 122, AB 125, and AB 177. AB 110 was described as a budget bill junior identifying budget-related legislation. AB 122 would extend sales tax to electronically delivered or remotely accessed prewritten software, extend and later limit business tax credits, reduce the annual LLC/LLP/LP tax for first-year businesses for three years, and impose a 100% tax on certain federal anti-weaponization fund settlements. AB 125 would renew the managed care organization (MCO) tax for three years beginning in 2027 to support Medi-Cal and targeted provider rate increases. AB 177 would require the Department of Finance to return by March 1, 2027 with options for assessing large employers for the Medi-Cal costs of employees enrolled in the program, including at least one employer-paid premium option for firms with 250 or more employees, and would appropriate $1,000 General Fund for implementation. Administration witnesses said AB 122 modernizes the tax system and helps create general fund revenue, while AB 125 is needed to preserve Medi-Cal financing and targeted rate increases under new federal constraints from H.R. 1 and to avoid a budget hole if the MCO tax expires. On AB 177, Finance said the bill is only a study and does not itself impose a tax, but would direct the administration to develop options for future consideration. Supportive members argued the package is part of a balanced approach to address the structural deficit, protect health care and other safety-net programs, and ensure large corporations pay more of their share. They also said AB 177 is a necessary step toward asking large employers to help cover public health care costs for workers who rely on Medi-Cal. Opponents, led by Vice Chair Niello and several other Republicans, argued the state does not have a revenue shortage but a spending problem, warning that the proposals would raise costs on consumers and businesses, discourage innovation, and expand taxes beyond their intended scope. They criticized AB 122 as potentially taxing labor-like services and limiting research and development credits, and said AB 125 would increase premiums for commercial enrollees and employers. On AB 177, they questioned the lack of definitions and specifics, saying the bill is too vague and could eventually burden employers, including hospitals and part-time workers, without clear standards. No votes were taken in the portion of the hearing provided; the committee heard testimony and questions before public comment and later action.

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 met to review budget and fiscal items, beginning with a roll call and a reminder about severe weather and the need to keep the meeting brief. Members first received the January fiscal status statement and certified the prior-year surplus at $577,073,871, with no changes from the prior month. The fiscal status statement was approved without objection. Staff then reviewed the five-year baseline budget and continuation/standstill budgets, noting projected imbalances in later years driven by revenue declines, including the redirection of motor vehicle sales tax, and by rising costs such as inflation and Medicaid adjustments. Representative Amadee asked about Medicaid growth and SNAP administrative costs, and staff explained that the SNAP federal match change is separate from Medicaid. The governor’s executive budget presentation focused on a third year of standstill budgeting, efficiency savings, and the impact of one-time reductions and agency reorganizations. Officials said the budget avoids recurring spending from nonrecurring revenue and incorporates savings from prior efficiency efforts. Major items discussed included funding for LA Gator vouchers, the high-impact jobs program at Louisiana Economic Development, DCFS modernization, corrections overtime and offender costs, Angola population growth, nursing home and MCO adjustments at LDH, and additional support for the MJ Foster Scholarship and Board of Regents systems. Members also discussed the distinction between state general fund and federal funds, the effect of inflation on specific purchases, and the use of surplus dollars, including deposits to the Budget Stabilization Fund and UAL paydown. No formal action was taken on the budget presentation. Later items included the FY27 expenditure limit calculation of $20.1 billion, up $953 million from FY26, and the annual comprehensive financial report, which received an unmodified audit opinion. The committee approved a BA-7 increasing federal funds for the governor’s office by $2 million for U.S. DOT-related infrastructure and rural transit work. It also approved Facility Planning and Control requests to add five higher education deferred maintenance projects and to combine two Baton Rouge Community College projects. CPRA received approval to extend contracts with Coastal Estuary Services and Access Sciences for monitoring and records-management services. The committee also approved a legislative intent clarification for a $500,000 appropriation to the New Orleans Recreational Development Foundation. The final major discussion was a presentation on a weighted caseload study for appellate and district courts. Judicial officials explained that the study updates an outdated formula used to assess judgeship needs, incorporates specialty courts and commissioners, and is intended as one tool in a broader collaborative process with the legislature. Members raised concerns about the number of judges, court funding, and how Louisiana compares with other states. No vote was taken on the study, but the discussion emphasized future collaboration on judicial resource allocation and possible structural changes.

Transcript Highlights:

• budget.
• When they're within that budget, within six months of that budget, they came back.
• So you're getting out the maintenance budget.
• Part of their budget goes up when their heating budget goes up. And then the revenue doesn't.
• Not necessarily within this budget alone.

Committee: House Commerce and Human Resources

Transcript Highlights:

• For example, the Harris County CSCD has over 30 detailed budgets.
• When the bill was laid out, it has 30 budgets; that's one county.
• Dallas County is the same size; it probably has 30 budgets too.
• If each one of those has ten budgets, that's an additional 80 budgets, bringing the total to 140 budgets
• The budgets are very complicated, not just in Harris County.

Bills: SB663 , SB958

Committee: House Corrections

Keywords: community supervision, budget approval, corrections department, strategic plan, judicial oversight, SB 958, Texas Government Code, nondisclosure, order of nondisclosure, criminal history record information, trafficking of persons, human trafficking, compelling prostitution, survivor rights, record sealing, expunction, deferred adjudication, prostitution, controlled substances, theft

Transcript Highlights:

• committee and was budget chairman.
• We were budgeted for, I think, 163 FTE.
• The proposed budget... ...budget in House Bill 2010 threatens to roll back that progress that we just
• recovery support budget?
• It's a tight budget year.

Committee: House Budget

Summary: The committee first heard the State Auditor’s fiscal year 2027 budget request. Auditor Scott Fitzpatrick described rebuilding the office after staffing had fallen to a historic low, explaining that the office has grown from 92.5 to 119 FTE but still needs several years to reach full staffing, especially at the manager level. He said most of the budget is payroll, noted the office’s use of lapsing general revenue while staffing is rebuilt, and outlined requests including core operating funds, a small sports betting audit NDI, and a $290,000 increase to the CPA stipend to address recruitment and retention problems. Members also discussed the auditor’s authority to audit state agencies and subrecipients, the office’s role in performance audits, and the meaning of “E” appropriations and the auditor’s recent general revenue conditions report. The committee then moved to public testimony on House Bill 10, focusing on Department of Health and Senior Services and Department of Mental Health issues. One witness from the American Heart Association supported continued funding for cardiac emergency response planning in schools, citing AEDs, CPR training, and about 480 schools served. Another witness from the Alzheimer’s Association urged rejection of a proposed $1 million reduction to the Missouri caregiver program, arguing it supports families caring for people with dementia and helps avoid more expensive institutional care. Most of the testimony concerned proposed cuts to developmental disability services, especially day habilitation and self-directed supports (SDS). Providers, family members, and workers said the proposed reductions would force service cuts, reduce wages, and threaten community-based care that keeps people at home and out of more costly facilities. They argued the cuts would shift costs to emergency, residential, or institutional settings and asked the committee to preserve current funding levels. Several members asked questions about provider rates, the share of services delivered by private providers, and the cost difference between SDS and institutional care. The hearing ended with the chair apologizing for earlier tension, explaining the schedule, and recessing the committee to return later because of House floor obligations.

Transcript Highlights:

• But there will be things that you don't like in this budget because every budget is that way.
• The health care budget bill, which contains provisions needed to implement the fiscal year 2027 budget
• needed to implement the FY 2027 budget.
• Members, yes, but we are telling ourselves that, so we are not using any of the budget surplus, the budget
• It comes out of our budget.

Transcript Highlights:

• </c> follows when it comes to the budget. follows when it comes to the budget.
• A bianial budget simply means budget.
• produces for his budget or his supplementary<00:15:25.519><c> budget.
• </c> put the budget in a good position. put the budget in a good position.
• </c> that budget is in negative territory. that budget is in negative territory.

Transcript Highlights:

• DCF now, this is the budget that moved from DHS, so it's not their entire budget.
• </c> employees um DCF now this is the budget employees um DCF now this is the budget that<00:04:44.000
• That's about 6% of our budget.
• That's about 3% of our budget.
• The governor's budget says this.

Committee: Senate Health and Human Services

Transcript Highlights:

• budgets, as those proposed budgets must be submitted to the ESDs for review and comment.
• school board meetings when pertinent budget information is on the agenda.
• As I look at it, the additional budget and oversight duties that I spoke to, in terms of the budget review
• So every school district has to turn their budget into an ESD to be approved.
• So every school district has to turn their budget into an ESD to be approved.

Summary: The House Education Committee heard several bills focused on school district operations, student access, and special education. Substitute Senate Bill 6222 would allow school districts and educational service districts to sell or grant surplus technology hardware, such as laptops and tablets, directly to public school students, with priority for low-income students and documentation of the transfer. Testimony from the sponsor, district staff, and advocates emphasized helping students keep familiar devices, reducing waste, and extending the public investment in technology. The committee also heard Second Substitute Senate Bill 5969, which would better integrate IEP transition plans with the statewide online IEP system and the universal high school and beyond plan platform to reduce duplication; staff noted a fiscal note had been requested, and there were no public testifiers on the bill. The committee spent substantial time on Engrossed Substitute Senate Bill 6247, a school district financial management bill. The bill would require additional ESD oversight and support for districts showing signs of financial distress, create mandatory school director training on funding and finance, strengthen penalties for knowing violations of budget expenditure limits, and require disclosure authorizations before hiring certain budget or accounting personnel. Senator Dozier said the bill was prompted by district financial problems, declining enrollment, failed levies, and reserve fund declines. ESD, WSSDA, WASA, WOSBO, and OSPI testified in support overall, though some witnesses raised concerns about mandatory training, funding for implementation, and whether training should extend beyond school directors. Committee members asked about the bill’s scope, the undefined term “significantly,” the $750,000 reimbursement cap, and how it compared with House Bill 2593. The committee also heard Substitute Senate Bill 622, which would exempt school districts and ESDs from certain surplus-property notice requirements when selling or granting surplus technology hardware to students at depreciated cost or no cost to low-income students. Senator Hunt said the bill came from constituent concerns about unused laptops and tablets and would help students transition to work, college, or technical school. Zero Waste Washington and an Issaquah School District official supported the measure, citing environmental benefits and practical student access to technology. The committee closed public hearings on the bills, noted sign-in counts for pro and con positions, and announced amendment deadlines and upcoming executive sessions.

Transcript Highlights:

• We are diving deep into budget policy.
• This is the governor's full $117.4 billion budget proposal.
• The Floridian First budget also includes increases in key areas of our FEFP budget: an increase of $100
• The Floridian First budget also includes increases in key areas of our FEFP budget: an increase of $100
• If you listen to the governor's budget presentation by Ms.

Committee: Senate Appropriations Committee on Pre-K - 12 Education

Transcript Highlights:

• The Senate Budget Subcommittee No. 1 on Education will come to order.
• That's the one we're requesting the provisional language to allow us to adjust our budget in the budget
• The May Revision includes budget bill language.
• And... 2025 Budget Act until June 30, 2027.
• But a budget is a reflection of priorities and of values.

Transcript Highlights:

• Beginning in the budget year, the Governor's budget revises the funding methodology in an effort to:
• So in the budget year proposal, what we are suggesting is that because the focus is... ...budget year
• lower than what was estimated at the Budget Act.
• Are you speaking to the Governor's budget? Yes.
• Those deferrals were adopted in the 25-26 budget and continue to create out-year budget pressure for

Summary: The committee heard testimony on three education budget items: the Expanded Learning Opportunities Program (ELOP), differentiated assistance/statewide system of support, and universal school meals plus kitchen infrastructure grants. For ELOP, the Department of Finance described the Governor’s proposal to provide $4.7 billion ongoing Proposition 98 funding and $62.4 million to set a minimum Tier 2 rate of $1,800 per pupil. The LAO recommended instead fixing the Tier 2 rate at $1,579, and committee members questioned how the rate was determined, how much funding is actually spent, and whether overlapping funding from ELOP, ACEs, and 21st Century programs is being tracked. CDE said ELOP is showing positive attendance and math outcomes, but some requested data will not be available until mid-2027; members also raised concerns about double-funding, transparency, and whether middle and high school students are being equitably served. On differentiated assistance, CCEE outlined the statewide system of support and the various tiers of universal, targeted, supplemental, and intensive assistance. Finance explained the Governor’s proposal to replace the current DA structure with a more stable universal and targeted assistance model, funded at $131.9 million ongoing, with a three-year support cycle aligned to LCAP and ESSA timelines and broader State Board authority to revise eligibility criteria. The LAO objected to considering the proposal before the State Board finalizes the new performance criteria, and committee members expressed concern that moving to a three-year cycle could delay support for LEAs that newly fall into need mid-cycle. There was also discussion about whether the proposal would weaken subgroup-based equity guardrails or give the State Board too much discretion over who qualifies for support. For school meals and kitchen infrastructure, Finance proposed $1.8 billion ongoing for universal meals and an additional $100 million ongoing plus $100 million one-time for a fourth round of kitchen infrastructure and training grants. The LAO recommended rejecting the new kitchen grant round because prior rounds are still being spent and the unmet need is not yet clear. CDE said prior investments have improved meal participation, efficiency, and menu variety, but many schools still lack the facilities for scratch cooking and face construction, electrical, and procurement barriers. Members asked for more data on how prior grants were used, which schools are benefiting, and whether funds could also support lower-cost food access strategies such as pantries, while noting federal restrictions on some meal-service innovations.

Transcript Highlights:

• The remainder of the state budget is about 40% of the general fund budget, about $46.8 billion.
• budgets</c><00:20:30.720><c> about</c> general fund budgets about general fund budgets about 46.8<00
• budget.
• </c> the general fund budget uh sales tax the general fund budget uh sales tax about<00:24:58.399><c>
• Hudson the the legislative budget Hudson the the legislative budget tracking<00:45:20.680><c> that</c

Committee: House Education Finance

Transcript Highlights:

• will it the inspection stickers how will that affect your budget will it affect your budget well it
• Since the majority of the budget units have similar functions, the right portion divides the budget by
• Since the majority of the budget units have similar functions, the right portion divides the budget by
• Please, let's focus on budget questions that are specific to the budget of the entity as best we can.
• Is that anywhere in your budget?

Committee: House Appropriations

Summary: The committee heard FY27 budget presentations for the Department of Public Safety and Corrections, beginning with Public Safety Services. House Fiscal Division staff reviewed the department’s recommended budget of $645.9 million, including supplemental pay, State Police, Motor Vehicles, and the State Fire Marshal. Officials explained that the overall budget reflects a net decrease from FY26, driven largely by shifts in funding sources, removal of one-time statutory dedications, and adjustments tied to undercollections in fees and self-generated revenues. State Police was recommended at $459.7 million, OMV at $86.7 million, and the Fire Marshal at $41.1 million. Department leaders also described ongoing modernization efforts, staffing vacancies, and the use of efficiencies identified internally. Lieutenant Colonel Robert Burns and agency heads testified about State Police operations, including increased cadet graduations, improved Mardi Gras security, progress on APHIS and OMV modernization, and the new crime lab under construction. Members asked about undercollections, vacancies, the role of public tag agents, and whether the agency could expand counter-drone capabilities. Burns said the department has identified about $11 million in efficiencies, but warned that counter-drone work would require additional funding, citing a $4.5 million fiscal note for HB 940 and roughly $9 million more for a robust unit. OMV officials said staffing and retention remain difficult, but modernization should improve service and reduce lines; they also said the agency continues to rely on public tag agents and is working through reinstatement fee collection issues. The committee then reviewed the Department of Corrections FY27 budget, recommended at $902.3 million, with most funding from State General Fund and a large increase tied to higher incarceration costs, medical needs, overtime, and added capacity at Louisiana State Penitentiary. DOC officials said the department remains under pressure from vacancies, turnover, contraband, and medical costs, and that the budget includes funding to add 150 correctional officers at Angola and to house ICE detainees at Camp J. They also discussed criminal justice reinvestment savings, prison enterprises, and reentry programs funded through the Second Chance Act. Members asked about staffing, inmate deaths at Elaine Hunt, work-release pay, and whether the department is tracking the true long-term cost of incarceration. Officials said they are pursuing pay increases, recruitment, expanded training and reentry programs, and more data-driven workforce alignment, while acknowledging that many budget pressures remain unresolved.

Transcript Highlights:

• The Senate Budget Subcommittee No. 1 on Education will come to order.
• That's the one we're requesting the provisional language to allow us to adjust our budget in the budget
• The May Revision includes budget bill language.
• The May Revision maintains the Governor's Budget The May Revision maintains the Governor's Budget proposals
• And 2025 Budget Act until June 30th, 2027.

Summary: The subcommittee heard May Revision proposals for higher education, beginning with the Bureau for Private Postsecondary Education. Finance proposed a one-time $10 million General Fund backfill to repay a special fund loan used to cover litigation costs, plus provisional language to allow budget flexibility for a remaining legal expense and to repay the loan without interest. The LAO opposed shifting the litigation costs to the General Fund and raised legal concerns about waiving interest on the loan, noting that special fund loans have historically been repaid with interest. Members asked about the litigation amount and the estimated interest savings, which Finance said would be about $245,000. The committee then discussed University of California funding, including the Governor’s proposed compact funding and a $1.5 million one-time increase for the First Star foster youth program at UC campuses. UC said the program has strong outcomes at UCLA, including a 100% college-going rate and high college completion rates, and that the new funding would expand the program to additional campuses and eventually be self-supporting through fundraising. The LAO recommended rejecting the proposal, arguing that UC already has overlapping outreach programs, including the Early Academic Outreach Program, and that the new initiative would duplicate existing services. Several senators questioned whether the state should expand a new program instead of strengthening existing ones, while UC and Finance emphasized the program’s focus on foster youth and its high success rates. For the California Community Colleges, Finance outlined the May Revision’s increase to the Student-Centered Funding Formula COLA from 2.41% to 4.31%, along with enrollment growth funding, categorical COLAs, deferred maintenance, and other ongoing and one-time investments. The Chancellor’s Office supported the flexible “super COLA” approach and asked for more enrollment growth funding, arguing that many districts are already above current targets and that unfunded growth restricts access. The LAO recommended funding at least the statutory COLA, redirecting some ongoing funds to enrollment growth or one-time priorities, and rejecting the $9.7 million Adult Learner Demonstration Project because districts already have incentives to do similar work. Senators pressed Finance and the Chancellor’s Office on the use of COLA funds to cover the new paid pregnancy disability leave requirement, the impact on hold-harmless and basic-aid districts, and whether the state should fund actual enrollment growth rather than a flat COLA. The committee also reviewed California Student Aid Commission proposals, including adjustments to Cal Grant and Middle Class Scholarship funding, continued Golden State Teacher Grant funding, and implementation of the federal Workforce Pell program. Finance said the Middle Class Scholarship changes reflected updated caseload estimates and that the higher 35% unmet-need level had been one-time funding, while CSAC urged continued support and noted the importance of financial aid for student success. The LAO recommended rejecting additional Golden State Teacher Grant funding as not well-targeted and urged caution on Workforce Pell trailer bill language, citing uncertainty about federal rules, ongoing administrative workload, and the need for clearer implementation planning. Members also raised concerns about declining CADAA applications and the need to better promote state aid for undocumented and mixed-status students. No votes were taken during the transcripted portion, and the committee moved through the agenda items with questions and testimony.

Transcript Highlights:

• As you weigh very difficult budget decisions in a difficult budget year, I urge you to restore and sustain
• The governor's budget also proposes, as Ms.
• The governor's budget also proposes, as Ms.
• That has not been adjusted for the budget.
• The Senate Budget Subcommittee No. 5 on Corrections and Public Safety, The Senate Budget Subcommittee

Summary: The committee heard budget and workload presentations from the Office of the State Public Defender, legal aid organizations, and the Judicial Branch. OSPD requested permanent funding for positions that had been temporarily funded to implement the Racial Justice Act, explaining that the work has become ongoing and now includes additional Supreme Court briefing, habeas proceedings, investigations, expert analysis, and data requests. The State Public Defender also presented the AB 625 public defense workload report, which found statewide staffing shortages, caseloads above recommended standards, and major gaps in investigators and support staff. Senators asked about racial bias claims, the volume of data requests, and the impact of Prop. 36, and OSPD said it would provide additional written information. The legal aid panel asked for a $50 million increase to the Equal Access Fund, $20 million to restart homelessness prevention services, and $10 million for health care access work, while also supporting Access to Justice Commission requests for loan repayment assistance, immigrant family preparedness services, and innovation grants. Witnesses described legal aid as homelessness prevention and cited examples involving eviction defense, domestic violence survivors, and immigration detention cases. Los Angeles Superior Court Presiding Judge Sergio Tapia discussed eviction data, low tenant representation, and court pilots in Compton and at Stanley Mosk that combine mediation, rental assistance, and legal help. Senators asked for service maps, outreach materials, and more detail on funding needs and federal funding losses. For the Judicial Branch overview, the Judicial Council and trial court representatives supported the Governor’s proposed budget, including $70 million for trial court operations, $21.7 million for employee health and retirement costs, and funding for appellate counsel, case processing, and courthouse construction. They said rising costs, staffing retention, and interpreter shortages continue to strain the courts, and described efforts to reallocate interpreter funds and recruit hard-to-find languages such as Mixteco. Senators pressed the branch and the Department of Finance on courthouse facilities, noting that the long-term need is far larger than the current budget proposal; Finance said the branch’s facility needs were estimated at about $22.5 billion over 10 years to start 68 projects and $29.4 billion to complete the remaining projects. The committee requested follow-up information on facilities, judgeships, and interpreter needs.

Transcript Highlights:

• Good afternoon and welcome to your favorite budget committee. Budget Sub 5.
• We have to have a little fun budget friends. We have to have a little fun, budget friends.
• restore structural balance in the budget.
• We have had 11 hearings in this Budget Sub 5.
• Remember, that's from the 2024-25 budget.

Summary: The committee opened with the State Controller’s Office May Revision requests, including funding for Fiscal book-of-record stabilization, a Broadcom IDMS licensing adjustment, the California State Payroll System, ACFR reporting automation, and $3 million for unclaimed property outreach. Testimony emphasized progress on Fiscal becoming the state’s accounting book of record in July, faster ACFR publication, and the move to electronic unclaimed property claims. Members asked about the size of the unclaimed property fund and how quickly money is transferred to the General Fund; the Controller’s office said about $15 billion is held, with most excess transferred regularly, and the LAO noted the fund is the General Fund’s fourth-largest revenue source. No concerns were raised by Finance or the LAO, and the item was closed after no public comment. The committee then heard the administration’s proposal to tax prewritten digital software and software-as-a-service, with Finance saying it would modernize sales tax treatment and raise an estimated $450 million General Fund and $560 million local revenue in 2026-27. The LAO supported modernizing the tax but suggested broader digital goods coverage and a business-use exemption; industry and taxpayer groups opposed the proposal, warning of higher costs for consumers and businesses. Members also heard CDTFA’s administrative request tied to the proposal, plus a separate CDTFA budget reduction reflecting lower operational needs; that reduction was presented as a savings item and drew positive reactions. Next, the committee considered federal conformity for “Trump accounts,” which would align California tax treatment with federal rules for tax-deferred children’s accounts and avoid tracking burdens for families. The LAO recommended approval, and the item drew no opposition. The committee also heard a proposal to cut the first-year $800 annual business tax to $400 for LLCs, LPs, and LLPs; Finance argued it would lower startup costs and encourage new business formation, while the LAO said the benefit was not well targeted and could subsidize entities that would form anyway. Members discussed the policy tradeoff, and public commenters split between support for small business relief and concern about revenue loss. The final major revenue item was a permanent business tax credit limitation, capping credits at the greater of $5 million per corporation or 50% of pre-credit liability, while excluding the low-income housing tax credit and personal income tax credits. Finance said it would raise significant revenue from large profitable corporations, and the LAO said it was a reasonable option but noted it would mainly affect the R&D credit and could have future implications for programs like California Competes. Public testimony was sharply divided, with business groups opposing the cap and anti-poverty advocates supporting it as a way to recapture revenue. The committee also heard FTB’s CalFile realignment request, which would return most of the direct-file-related resources to the General Fund while retaining a smaller staff to improve CalFile, and the California Arts Council’s request to reauthorize the Keep Arts in Schools voluntary contribution fund, which members and advocates supported despite relatively modest annual donations. The hearing continued with GoBiz proposals on civic media funding, CA RISE reappropriation, and a semiconductor facility reversion, with the LAO supporting the latter two and members raising questions about the civic media program’s scope, outreach, and inclusion of broadcast and ethnic media.

Transcript Highlights:

• Major budget issues and proposals from the department in the Governor's Budget include the managed care
• Costs since the January budget also reflect...
• You all budget based on actuals.
• We're seeing trends higher than what we budgeted or assumed as part of the Budget Act and as part of
• Due to the budget deficit, it was not included in the budget.

Summary: The committee heard a budget oversight hearing on the Department of Health Care Services, focusing first on the overall Medi-Cal budget and a March General Fund loan to cover a current-year shortfall. DHCS said the 2025-26 budget proposal totals $193.4 billion, with Medi-Cal projected at $188.1 billion total funds and $42.1 billion General Fund, driven by higher enrollment, pharmacy costs, managed care growth, and costs tied to eligibility expansions and the COVID-era redetermination unwinding. The department said the $3.44 billion loan was needed to manage cash flow and ensure timely payments to providers and plans, while the LAO noted Medi-Cal’s cash-basis budgeting creates volatility and that more detailed estimates would come with the May Revision. Members discussed federal Medicaid threats, the need for transparency on cost drivers, and the impact of pharmacy spending, long-term care, and immigration-related coverage expansions. The second major topic was family health programs, including California Children’s Services, the continuous coverage unwinding, and opioid settlement fund spending. DHCS described CCS funding methodology changes, ongoing county stakeholder work, and a delayed rollout of CCS monitoring and oversight until July 1, 2025, while county representatives and advocates argued the program is underfunded and asked for more technical assistance and a delay in implementation. On the unwinding, the department explained that federal redetermination flexibilities helped maintain coverage after the pandemic, but the Governor’s budget proposes ending them at the end of June 2025; advocates urged making the flexibilities permanent to avoid coverage losses. For opioid settlement funds, DHCS and Finance said the budget increases funding for naloxone distribution while reducing other harm-reduction spending based on updated settlement revenues, prompting criticism from members and public commenters who argued the change would weaken effective harm-reduction programs. The hearing also included an update on Proposition 35 implementation. DHCS said the voter-approved measure continuously appropriates MCO tax revenues beginning in 2025, with up to $4.6 billion annually available for specified Medi-Cal and provider investments in 2025 and 2026, but implementation depends on consultation with the required stakeholder advisory committee. The department and LAO noted uncertainty about future federal rules affecting the MCO tax after 2026. Public testimony largely supported maintaining Medi-Cal expansions, protecting immigrant coverage, preserving harm-reduction funding, and increasing support for community health workers, pediatric dental care, and CCS county administration. No votes were taken during the portion of the hearing provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• </c> oversee them and their budget? oversee them and their budget?
• . budget. budget.
• They're budgeted in personnel lines. They're budgeted in contract lines.
• They're budgeted in personnel lines. They're budgeted in contract lines.
• </c> and the budget neutrality factor. and the budget neutrality factor. the<01:20:52.640><c> budget<

Committee: House Finance