Transcript Highlights:

• year 2025-26 and $146,000 ongoing beginning in fiscal year 2026-27.
• So the second piece on the analysis of prices is to look at market integration.
• My name is Taylor Sick, and I'm the Chief Fiscal Officer for the Department of Consumer Affairs.
• I am joined by my colleague Maxwell Macedo, who is our director of fiscal and administration.
• Tomorrow we are about to open the slate of programs for fiscal year 2025-26.

Summary: The Assembly Budget Subcommittee 5 on State Administration held an informational hearing on budget issues for the Department of Veterans Affairs, the Department of Cannabis Control, the Department of Consumer Affairs, the Commission on the Status of Women and Girls, and the California Arts Council. The chair noted there would be no votes. CalVet gave an overview of its programs serving veterans and families, including transition assistance, county veterans service officers, education approvals, housing and homelessness programs, home loans, long-term care homes, and state veterans cemeteries. Members asked about future long-term care needs for aging veterans, staffing and recruitment challenges at veterans homes, and the Yountville steam infrastructure replacement project, for which CalVet sought a $38.8 million reappropriation and said federal reimbursement was expected. CalVet also discussed the role of county veterans service officers in helping veterans file claims and avoid predatory unaccredited representatives. The Department of Cannabis Control described its regulatory role from seed to sale and requested one position to implement SB 1064’s combined activities license. Members and public witnesses focused heavily on the illicit cannabis market, enforcement staffing, and the impact of taxes and fees on the legal market. DCC said it had roughly 87 enforcement positions with about a 15% vacancy rate and more than 200 compliance staff. Its economist presented the 2024 cannabis market report, which found licensed production and retail quantity were up, but retail value and prices were down, with an estimated 11.4 million pounds of illicit production and about 60% of California consumption still coming from the illicit market. Industry witnesses argued the legal market is in crisis, urged repeal of the scheduled excise tax increase, stronger enforcement against illicit cannabis and hemp-derived intoxicants, and expanded retail access. The Department of Consumer Affairs briefly presented nine budget proposals, including a $2.6 million ongoing request to maintain a business modernization system for several boards and bureaus. The Commission on the Status of Women and Girls described its work on economic and educational equity, health care, violence prevention, student rights, and archival and outreach projects, and said its budget request would convert limited-term positions to permanent. A member urged the commission to narrow its priorities toward current issues such as affordability, child care, and women’s health. The California Arts Council outlined its role as the state’s only statewide arts funder and requested restoration of $5 million in local assistance; supporters testified that the funding would leverage additional local investment and help sustain arts access, especially in rural communities. The hearing ended after the non-presentation items were noted and no further public comment was offered.

Transcript Highlights:

• have no fiscal impact.
• <01:41:32.520> is the pending cost benefit analysis is the pending cost benefit analysis is
• note as passing it will have no fiscal note as passing it will have no fiscal<01:41:43.440> impact
• the fiscal note so this there's a fiscal the fiscal note so this there's a fiscal note<02:28:37.080
• <05:16:54.520> um quantifiable cost benefit analysis um quantifiable cost benefit analysis

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Did you do any kind of fiscal note to see what the cost would be? Mr.
• Chair and Senator Kuby, so there is a fiscal note on this.
• Their analysis anticipates a state cost of $1.8 million general fund.
• Their analysis anticipates a state cost of $1.8 million general fund.
• Their analysis anticipates a state cost of $1.8 million general fund.

Bills: HB2051, HB2114, HB2127, HB2134, HB2207, HB2574, HB2700, HB2800, HB2916

Keywords: AHCCCS, lactation care, breastfeeding, health services, healthcare access, motorcycle registration, safety fund, education, awareness programs, low-income scholarships, motorcycle training, special license plates, transportation, funding, nonprofits, charitable contributions, critical infrastructure, foreign adversaries, China, communications

Summary: The Committee on Appropriations met with all members present, approved the March 17, 2026 minutes, and announced its final hearing would be the following Tuesday at 8:30 a.m. The committee first heard HB 2134, the Arizona Critical Infrastructure Protection Act, which would bar state and critical infrastructure entities from contracting with Chinese companies for access to critical infrastructure, prohibit Chinese-produced software and equipment in certain systems, require annual certifications and reporting, and direct the Corporation Commission and DEMA to implement oversight and emergency communications measures. The sponsor and a witness argued the bill was a targeted national-security measure and a companion to federal efforts; concerns were raised about cost, overlap with federal law, and staffing, but the bill received a do-pass recommendation on a 6-4 vote. The committee then considered HB 2051, which would require AHCCCS contractors, subject to CMS approval, to provide breastfeeding and lactation care services in multiple settings. Testimony from lactation consultants, researchers, advocates, and tribal representatives emphasized maternal and infant health benefits, access gaps, and potential Medicaid savings; AHCCCS and ADHS were neutral, with AHCCCS estimating a $1.8 million general fund cost and ADHS saying it could not absorb implementation costs. The committee adopted a 15-page amendment creating a voluntary state certification for lactation care providers and a DHS advisory committee, then passed the bill as amended on a 9-0 vote. HB 2700, creating a technology-first study committee on assistive technology for people with disabilities, also passed unanimously after testimony from disability advocates and a proposed amendment to add minority-party appointments was discussed but not voted on. HB 2800, which increases the penalty for knowingly lending a vehicle to a person with a DUI-related driving restriction if that person causes serious injury or death, drew extensive debate over whether the felony penalty was appropriate when the lender may not know the eventual outcome; after testimony from the sponsor and the victim’s widow, the bill passed 9-1. HB 2114, which uses motorcycle safety fund money for scholarships for rural and low-income riders and requires ADOT to issue motorcycle registrations only when an owner has a class M license, passed 10-0 amid concerns that the license language may need clarification on the floor. The committee then began HB 2127, an omnibus special-plates bill with multiple amendments, but discussion centered on whether one amendment was hostile and whether a community-college plate should be offered later; no final action on HB 2127 was taken in the portion provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• Um, can you help me understand, reading the fiscal note and Representative Shamberg's point about the
• I was an English major, so I try not to do math in public, but the language, or at least the analysis
• I am sorry, but I can't apply that analysis if it is in this report, and it may be, but it would take
• That probably do the fiscal note. Okay.
• the state fiscal year assuming that's the state fiscal year because<01:19:00.640> most<01:19:

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The hearing focused on House Bill 302, which would allow the state treasurer to invest public funds in precious metals and digital assets. The sponsor was not present, so Representative Urs introduced the bill briefly and said he did not know much about it. No one from the Treasury Department testified, and members repeatedly noted the treasurer’s absence. Susan Elme testified against the bill, arguing that these investments are highly volatile and contrary to the treasury’s duty to remain stable and liquid. She said the bill should be killed. In questioning, she estimated the 5% cap in the bill would amount to roughly $10 million, depending on available funds, and said such investing would be more appropriate for an individual day trader than for the state treasury. Members also discussed prior legislative experience with Bitcoin-related proposals and raised concerns about whether the treasury had the staff expertise to manage commodity or digital asset investing. The committee did not take a final vote; instead, it agreed to hold a work session and seek additional information from the treasurer, with a plan to revisit the bill on April 1.

Transcript Highlights:

• Is there a fiscal impact beyond what I heard you say? I think. It's about $80,000.
• Did you say there is a fiscal impact on this bill as it exists? Thank you for the question.
• No, there is no fiscal impact on this bill. Who provides the grant? Thank you for the question.
• I am really just trying to get to the bottom of the fiscal impact.
• And if they are making it on a financial analysis, they need to provide that to the clients.

Bills: HB2894, HB3418, HB3415, HB3413, HB3414, HB3416, HB3417, HB3419, HB3420, HB1739, HB1752, HB1979, HB2941, HB2992, HB3075, HB3086, HB3177, HB3269, HB3278, HB3279, HB3497, HB3644, HB4432, HB3720, HB3849, HB3882, HB3919, HB3941, HB4118, HB4141, HB4268, HB4342, HB4428, HB4429, HB4434

Keywords: HB2894, Oklahoma Rural Jobs Act, rural jobs, rural investment, tax credit, capital investment tax credit, state tax credits, economic development, rural fund, rural investor, qualified investment, eligible business, Department of Commerce, rural business, investment certification, tax liability, credit cap, workforce development, small business finance, rural development

Transcript Highlights:

• Tracy, for the full and thorough analysis.
• I can see, conceptually, where not the thoroughness of the analysis, but the depth of the analysis can
• At the time, at the end of the fiscal year 2023-2024, and that offer was declined.
• We also have agency trust costs for the last two fiscal years, including...
• We also have agency trust costs for the last two fiscal years included in our discussion.

Summary: The subcommittee first heard a lengthy Auditor General presentation on the Department of Management Services’ fleet management operations. The audit found major problems with oversight, recordkeeping, policies, fee-setting, purchase and disposal approvals, public auction controls, and FleetWave system access and processing. Key findings included that 2,279 vehicles valued at more than $57 million could not be matched between FleetWave and FLAIR, disposal records were missing or incomplete, user access remained active long after employees separated, and the department had not documented a reasonable basis for its $1.75 per-vehicle monthly fee. Members expressed strong concern about the accuracy of the state’s fleet inventory and the risk of waste or misuse. DMS Secretary Allende said the department concurred with the findings, was working with the Auditor General, and planned corrective actions, including better training, clearer guidance, improved reconciliation, and possible centralization or pilot programs for fleet purchasing and management. The committee then returned to vacancy discussions with several agencies. The Division of Administrative Hearings said its two long-vacant judges of compensation claims positions had been hard to fill because of low pay and short reappointment terms, but the chief judge said the division could operate without them and offered those positions up as part of a reduction exercise. The Public Service Commission reported 42 vacancies but said statutory deadlines were still being met, though staff workloads and depth of analysis were affected. The commission also said vacancies help it manage salaries within its trust-fund budget. Members questioned whether some of those positions were truly needed given the lack of delays. The Florida Gaming Control Commission reported 29 vacancies, including a vacant chair that prevented appointment of an inspector general, and said the chair vacancy was a gubernatorial appointment issue. The acting executive director also said the commission’s compulsive gambling prevention program had lapsed after no responsive bids were received for a new contract, but an invitation to negotiate was nearly complete and a new provider was expected soon. The Public Employee Relations Commission reported that its caseload had more than doubled after Senate Bill 256, which increased union recertification work; it said it was meeting deadlines only with overtime and that the workload had not fallen despite decertifications. Members asked for follow-up data on union cases, vacancy needs, and whether some positions across agencies could be reallocated to better match workload.

Transcript Highlights:

• THERE WAS ANALYSIS DONE. IS NOT GOING TO BE A HEAVY BURDEN.
• YOU MAY REFERENCE THE ANALYSIS AND THEN YOU JUST SAID AND VERIFIED IMMEDIATELY.
• IN THE ANALYSIS WE SPOKE TO CHALLENGES WITH VERIFYING. >> Chair Buchanan: REPRESENTATIVE?
• I WAS THERE NO FISCAL? AND LET'S JUST START THERE? >> Chair Buchanan: REPRESENTATIVE ABBOTT?
• CONSIDERING THE FISCAL IMPACT WAS MADE MARCH 06, 2025.

Transcript Highlights:

• Now let's move forward to fiscal year 2024 on page 3.
• In fiscal year 2024, you will see that we also received $20 million.
• Now I'm going to dive into an enrollment analysis on page six.
• The start of the fiscal year is July 1st. Once again, it was new for us.
• I will tell you, as of this fiscal year, fiscal year 2026, all of that was done by the first week of

Transcript Highlights:

• Wayne Thorley, for the record, LCB Fiscal Analysis Division.
• Wayne Thorley for the record, LCB Fiscal Analysis Division.
• Wayne Thorley, for the record, LCB Fiscal Analysis Division.
• Kathy Crockett, LCB Fiscal Analysis Division.
• Wayne Thorley, for the record, LCB Fiscal Analysis Division.

Bills: AB102, AB108, AB117, AB213, AB220, AB221, AB251, AB259, AB331, AB336, AB375, AB379, AB409, AB475, AB476, AB550, AB575, AB594, SB466

Keywords: emergency medical services, ambulance, licensing, health district, paramedic, training requirements, outdoor education, recreation, grant program, environment, funding, special license plates, vehicle registration, custom plates, state revenue, transportation, public works, prevailing wage, custom fabrication, nonstandard materials

Transcript Highlights:

• Olafson's uh capital investment<00:07:51.480> fiscal<00:07:51.880> analysis,<00:07:52.800
• > if<00:07:52.920> we<00:07:53.040> don't investment fiscal analysis, if we don't
• investment fiscal analysis, if we don't have<00:07:53.320> any<00:07:53.480> bill,<00:
• Chair, members, Bjorn Arnison, Senate Counsel, Research and Fiscal Analysis.
• Fiscal Analysis. Fiscal Analysis.

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Have we done an analysis, or do you have an analysis of what percent of districts actually prepay?
• I don't have that analysis.
• We urge you to support this fiscally sound and fair policy. Thanks. Members, any questions?
• analysis because they don't run them this way, I took...
• I, too, think it's very fiscally responsible, and I support this. I'll co-author this.

Bills: HB123, HB5606, HB549, HB2757, HB4359, HB5381, HB1939, HB123

Keywords: HB 123, kindergarten readiness, early literacy, early numeracy, reading screening, math screening, foundational literacy, foundational numeracy, dyslexia screening, reading intervention, math intervention, teacher academy, literacy academy, mathematics academy, interventionist academy, K-3 assessments, school readiness, prekindergarten, tutoring grant, parent-directed tutoring

Transcript Highlights:

• We don't have the fiscal analysis to show what would be for illegal immigrants versus non-citizens who
• We don't have the fiscal analysis to show what would be for illegal immigrants versus non-citizens who
• We don't have the fiscal analysis to show what would be for illegal immigrants versus non-citizens who
• We don't have the fiscal analysis to show what would be for illegal immigrants versus non-citizens who
• We don't have the fiscal analysis to show what would be for illegal immigrants versus non-citizens who

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• about fiscal responsibility, long-term about fiscal responsibility, long-term stewardship<00:04:
• I think the fiscal case is clear.
• fiscal guardrail within the bill there. fiscal guardrail within the bill there.
• it directs MnDOT to create a fiscal it directs MnDOT to create a fiscal transparency<00:10:37.720
• within fiscal and physical constraints. within fiscal and physical constraints.

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• The board then voted on a new framework for the model to be implemented in the 27-28 fiscal year that
• It's down somewhat, about $400 million over the last two fiscal years.
• Over the last two fiscal years.
• Through your analysis, why was it a more modest?
• Through your analysis, why was it a more modest 2.4% over the last seven years?

Summary: The Appropriations Committee on Higher Education met to hear two presentations focused on the state university system: an update from the Board of Governors on performance-based funding and a state university efficiency study from Ben Watkins of the Division of Bond Finance. Chair Harrell emphasized accountability, maintaining Florida’s top-ranked higher education system, and getting the best return on state investment. A quorum was present, with several senators excused and one arriving later in the meeting. Sarah Donaghi outlined changes to the performance-based funding model. She said the current model will be used for 2026-27 funding, with only minor benchmark changes for metrics tied to programs of strategic emphasis, reflecting a statutory review that reduced the list of designated programs from about 800 to about 200. She also described a new “PBF 2.0” framework approved by the Board of Governors for implementation in 2027-28 funding, which will combine excellence and improvement measures, update benchmarks to the SUS 2030 strategic plan, reduce “layups” where many schools score perfect tens, expand the affordability metric to include students without loans, remove SUS transfer students from certain graduation metrics, and create a new transfer-student outcome metric. The board will run the new model alongside the current one before using it for funding, and no funding changes will occur this year. Watkins presented findings from an eight-month efficiency study ordered by executive order. Using audited financial data, student outcome data, and personnel data, he concluded that Florida’s universities provide strong value because of low tuition, rising degree production, and improved job placement and earnings outcomes. He said tuition remains the lowest in the country and that state support has increased, while per-student spending has also risen, driven largely by payroll costs. He argued that universities should operate more like business enterprises, with more granular budgeting, clearer financial reporting, and efficiency metrics such as operating expense per student and cost per degree, and he recommended that such measures be incorporated into performance funding and board oversight. Committee members asked about national comparisons, data transparency, payroll growth, admissions selectivity, and whether legislation should require more detailed institutional reporting. The meeting ended with no public comment and adjournment after Senator Bracey Davis moved to adjourn.

Transcript Highlights:

• We'll let those... projects out over the first quarter of the federal fiscal year—October, November,
• This fiscal year than last fiscal year between the pay increase, the shift in healthcare benefits, and
• If I did, would you reiterate what the total budget for NMDOT is for this fiscal year? Mr.
• The BRM database can also perform some analysis, trying to predict future projects.
• The overload program, a beam analysis program, is used for these overweight permits.

Transcript Highlights:

• Now it exists and will be completed by, in terms of the Department of Revenue's analysis, it will be
• <00:27:21.480> um that here versus not here analysis um that here versus not here analysis
• <01:00:05.960> year putting us in a deficit in fiscal year putting us in a deficit in fiscal
• First of all, an analysis of whether or not it's going to increase...
• <01:21:56.400> of first of all um uh an analysis of first of all um uh an analysis of whether

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Rodriguez, you talked about asset analysis and target sectors.
• This is from a cluster analysis that we did during the interim.
• Actually, do that sort of analysis from the LFC.
• I know you're doing the analysis now, I get it. ...how long that takes.
• Here's a little bit of our larger fiscal picture.

Transcript Highlights:

• In fiscal year 2023, there were over 15,000 pending cases in the backlog.
• In fiscal year 2025, this number grew to over 25,000 cases.
• billion in fiscal year 2030.
• to be $1.5 billion in fiscal year 2030.
• Thanks to DIR, Finance, and LEO for your analysis on this really complicated issue.

Summary: The Budget Subcommittee on State Administration heard presentations on the Department of Industrial Relations’ labor-related budget items, with the main focus on proposed trailer bill language to reform the Subsequent Injury Benefits Trust Fund (SIBTF) and a related budget change proposal for staffing. DIR said SIBTF has grown far beyond its original purpose, citing the 2020 Todd decision, expanded eligibility based on chronic or asymptomatic conditions, and a backlog that has grown to more than 30,000 pending cases. The administration argued the reforms would restore guardrails, reduce liabilities and employer assessments, and speed processing for severely injured workers; the LAO said the proposal was largely consistent with its prior recommendations. Members raised concerns about using trailer bill language for major policy changes, the retroactive application to open cases, and the impact on workers already in the queue, while supporters from employer groups and public agencies backed the proposal as necessary to control costs and restore sustainability. Public comment was split, with injured-worker advocates opposing the retroactive changes and business/public employer representatives supporting the reforms. The committee then heard the SIBTF workload request, which would phase in 177 positions over five years at a cost of $36.5 million, including staff for the Division of Workers’ Compensation, the Office of the Director Legal Unit, and administrative support. DIR said the additional staffing is intended to address very high caseloads and reduce processing times, but emphasized that the request assumes the reform package is adopted; LAO agreed the staffing increase made sense if paired with reforms. Members asked about vacancy rates, current staffing, and whether the workload request would become the new normal, and DIR said it would monitor caseload trends and adjust future requests as needed. Finally, the committee received an update on the California Workplace Outreach Program (CWOP), which DIR described as a partnership with community-based organizations to educate workers and help employers comply with labor laws. DIR reported that CWOP has reached 1.75 million workers and employers and made 8 million touchpoints since 2020, with the current round awarding $50.7 million to 87 partners for a two-year period through June 2027. Members and public commenters highlighted the program’s role in reaching immigrant, farmworker, janitorial, nail salon, and other vulnerable communities, and several speakers urged continued funding at $30 million per year for five years. No votes were taken during the hearing.

Transcript Highlights:

• Chair, I understand it from the JLBC analysis that I read, on JLBC's list they have a number three that
• Chair, I understand it from the JLBC analysis that I read, on JLBC's list they have a number three that
• And I would also just remind lawmakers that while your JLBC analysis... ...does take these and makes
• These tax cuts are estimated to cost $1.45 billion over fiscal years 2026 to 2029.
• In fiscal year alone, that would cost us $80 million.

Bills: SB1638

Keywords: taxation, income tax, internal revenue code, deductions, tax benefits, retroactive, standard deduction, 1182, all

Summary: The Senate Finance Committee took up SB 1638, a tax conformity bill that would update Arizona’s tax code to the Internal Revenue Code as of January 1, 2026 and incorporate federal changes from 2025. The bill also included individual income tax subtractions for tips, overtime, seniors, and auto loan interest, along with changes to the standard deduction and charitable contribution deduction. Committee discussion focused heavily on whether Arizona should conform broadly to federal changes or limit the bill to more targeted, temporary provisions. Two amendments were considered. The chair’s amendment was described as clarifying only, addressing retroactivity and foreign dividend language, and it was adopted. Senator Epstein’s amendment would have removed the broader conformity provisions and the modified charitable deduction, limited the standard deduction change to tax year 2025, and kept the individual subtractions; she argued the business-related conformity items mainly benefited corporations and should be negotiated in the budget. Opponents said the amendment would create unnecessary recalculations and uncertainty for taxpayers and businesses, while supporters of the underlying bill said conformity was needed quickly to match Department of Revenue forms and avoid filing-season confusion. Epstein’s amendment failed. Public testimony split along similar lines. Business and tax group representatives supported prompt conformity, saying taxpayers and small businesses needed certainty and that the department’s forms should be codified. Opponents argued the bill would reduce state revenue substantially and mainly benefit higher-income taxpayers and corporations, while diverting money from education, child care, and health care. After debate, the committee voted to move SB 1638 as amended with a do-pass recommendation, passing it by about 4-3, and then adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• And proposal for for fiscal year 2026.
• <00:05:05.680> year surplus procedures through fiscal year surplus procedures through fiscal
• Ghost students and the new federal needs analysis.
• So, no evidence federal needs analysis.
• Uh, I just wanted to look at page two of three of the Senate fiscal analysis and just compelled to come

Keywords: 919, house, all

Summary: The Higher Education Conference Committee reviewed differences among the Governor’s, House, and Senate proposals for state grant parameter changes and their effects on state grant spending, North Star Promise spending, and average student awards. Nonpartisan staff explained that the proposals use different combinations of parameter changes, with the Governor’s and Senate plans modeled to avoid or minimize rationing, while the House plan would require rationing to balance the program. Staff reported projected biennium balances of a positive $29.836 million for the Governor’s proposal, a negative $60.758 million for the House proposal without rationing, a positive $994,000 for the House proposal with rationing, and a positive $3.623 million for the Senate proposal; North Star Promise balances also varied, with the Senate showing a positive balance and the Governor and House with rationing showing negative balances. Staff also said the Senate proposal would extend availability of the state grant appropriation and suspend surplus procedures through fiscal year 2029, allowing the balance to carry forward. The committee then focused on the House-only tuition and fee cap provision, which would limit the tuition recognized for state grant purposes for four-year programs to the University of Minnesota Twin Cities level, with 1% annual increases in fiscal years 2026 and 2027. House members said the cap was intended to address rising tuition, especially at the University of Minnesota, and to produce savings in the state grant program. The governor’s office confirmed the provision was not included in the Governor’s bill. Representatives from the University of Minnesota and the Minnesota Private College Council opposed the cap, arguing it would reduce awards for low-income students and shift costs to students rather than address underlying tuition pressures; they also said it could discourage enrollment at higher-cost institutions. Supporters from Minnesota State argued the cap would improve fairness because students at lower-tuition institutions are effectively capped lower, while students at more expensive institutions receive larger awards, and they said the legislature should intervene in a variable that has grown substantially over time. Committee members questioned how the cap would work and whether it was tied to the Twin Cities campus rate. Testifiers clarified that the state grant formula is tied to the University of Minnesota level, but because Minnesota State institutions are below that level, the cap effectively limits their students to their own lower tuition while allowing higher awards at the University of Minnesota and private colleges. No formal vote or final action was taken in the portion of the meeting provided; the chair indicated the committee would continue with item-by-item review of the remaining parameter changes and hear additional testimony from agencies and institutions.