Transcript Highlights:

• In the meantime, this revenue package allows the state to prevent some of the most devastating reductions
• The revenue package also allows for continued investment...
• The revenue package also allows for continued investments in education, child care, affordable housing
• So as we move this budget along, I think it's the only way we're going to be able to sustain what we
• So I'm... ...sustain what we have and even continue to grow.

Committee: Senate Budget and Fiscal Review

Transcript Highlights:

• The tax package that the governor vetoed, if you have questions about that, the final bill directed all
• They didn't do it because they just started packaging all the miniatures together, increasing it just
• and stably to sustain these interventions going forward.
• Wei's presentation because she talked about sustainable prevention.
• Wei talked about, and that's the sustained prevention approach, in order to break these cycles that are

Committee: House House Government, Elections & Indian Affairs

Transcript Highlights:

• Chair and members, Matt Klovenstein, on behalf of the Center for Sustainable Good afternoon, Chair and
• thank you for your partnership as we, along with, you know, opposition concerns, turn this into a package
• You know, opposition concerns turn this into a package that is going to deliver real savings.
• When I say that we view this as a package, I do because when I sat on 254 and on 540, which is a regional
• In short, my district and, like many others, have faced sustained PSPS events, and they must be treated

Summary: The committee heard several energy and water affordability bills, with extensive testimony on SB 254 by Senator Becker, SB 541 by Senator Becker, SB 453 by Senator Stern, SB 292 by Senator Caballero, and SB 473 by Senator Padilla. SB 254 was presented as a broad utility affordability package addressing short-term climate credits, a Power Fund, tighter scrutiny of rate increases and utility profits, wildfire spending, securitization of future utility costs, and streamlining. Supporters, including TURN and several environmental and public power groups, said it could lower bills and reduce long-term costs; opponents from investor-owned utilities, labor, business, and local government raised concerns about market impacts, insufficient analysis, and the breadth of the bill. The committee approved SB 254 on a 6-3 vote and placed it on call. SB 541 focused on load flexibility and using existing grid capacity more efficiently. Senator Becker described it as a transparency and planning measure to identify cost-effective load shifting and reduce peak demand, while supporters said it could improve resiliency and save money. Several CCAs and utilities opposed the bill in print or unless amended, arguing that some language implied a mandate and that the concept needed more cost-effectiveness analysis; the author said amendments would remove language dividing the state goal among retail suppliers and clarify that the bill is not a procurement mandate. The committee passed SB 541 as amended to Appropriations on a 9-1 vote and left it on call. SB 453 by Senator Stern would return unspent ratepayer-funded microgrid program dollars and was described as a way to keep the lights on and redirect unused funds. It drew support from local government and environmental groups, with PG&E expressing concern about how the bill would affect its ability to spend awarded funds. The committee passed SB 453 as amended to Appropriations on a 12-0 vote. SB 292 by Senator Caballero would require more granular outage and reliability reporting, including census-tract-level data, to better inform resilience planning after PSPS events; utilities opposed unless amended, citing duplicative reporting and regulatory overlap, but the bill passed 12-0 to Appropriations. SB 473 by Senator Padilla would require or expand water utility decoupling to promote conservation and affordability. Supporters, including water utilities, labor, business, and local government groups, argued decoupling stabilizes revenue, supports conservation, and can keep rates lower for low-use customers. The Public Advocates Office opposed, saying prior pilot data showed no conservation benefit and about $1 billion in added costs, and that the CPUC had already rejected similar requests. Committee members questioned the conservation and capital-investment effects of the different rate structures; the author and supporters argued decoupling helps utilities fund infrastructure while allowing lower fixed charges for low-use customers. The transcript ends during that discussion, before a final vote on SB 473 is shown.

Transcript Highlights:

• And there are towns where a center-based program couldn't possibly be sustained.
• You know, we have some be sustained.
• , as part of our New Hampshire package that's not going to be DHS's bailiwick.
• Do you have anything sustainability.
• as part of our New Hampshire package as part of our New Hampshire economic<01:11:42.159><c> the</c><

Summary: The committee met with DHS Chief Financial Officer Nathan White to receive an update on the department’s budget lapse and vacancy rates. White explained the difference between the “back-of-the-budget” reduction and lapse assumptions, saying DHS is facing a current biennium reduction of about $23 million and estimating roughly a $60 million general fund lapse in state fiscal year 2025, compared with about $13.5 million the prior year. He said DHS’s lapse is driven largely by program utilization, labor market conditions, contract spending, and statutory carry-forwards in areas such as Medicaid and developmental disabilities, which tend to produce a smaller lapse in the first year of the biennium and a larger one in the second year. He also noted that the House and Senate budgets differ on some operating items, including Medicaid rates, with the Senate having struck a House proposal to reduce rates by 3%. Members questioned White about whether DHS ever spends down lapse money on last-minute purchases. He said the department does not engage in that practice, though it does retain some flexibility in its facilities budget for emergencies. He also described the process for transferring funds within and between class lines, including the need for fiscal committee approval above statutory thresholds, and gave examples such as moving funds to cover overtime in the SYSC budget and to ensure Medicaid payments for nursing facilities. White said such transfers are public and transparent and are reviewed by the governor and Executive Council. The committee then discussed DHS staffing. White said the department has a little over 3,200 authorized positions, with a vacancy rate around 14.5%, and that a hiring freeze had been imposed a few months earlier while exempting direct care positions. He said DHS is planning for about a $30 million general fund reduction to personnel, equivalent to just under 400 positions, and is managing postings centrally to stay within budget by July 1. In response to questions about the loss of about $80 million in federal funds, White and Associate Commissioner Patricia Tilly said DHS avoided layoffs by shifting staff into vacant positions, but that the cuts affected community contracts, public health workers, laboratory work, and some IT/data projects. Tilly said roughly 20 positions were affected, most were reassigned, a few staff left voluntarily, and the department has less flexibility going forward if more federal funding ends.

Transcript Highlights:

• Pennsylvania just released a grid package, their grid package of incentives with great rate protections
• You could implement a competitive process through the Sustainable Energy Utility.
• You could implement a competitive process through the sustainable utility.
• You can implement it through the PSC. competitive process through the sustainable utility.
• They recently announced their grid package.

Committee: Senate Environment, Energy & Transportation

Summary: The committee heard several bills focused on energy, public safety, and environmental cleanup. House Bill 455 would create a historic preservation license plate to raise funds and awareness for Delaware preservation efforts, and House Bill 471 would tighten rules and penalties for off-highway vehicles on shared private roads, with golf carts excluded. House Substitute No. 1 for House Bill 439, the Truth in E-Bike Marketing Act, would require clearer disclosures when selling electric mopeds and electric motorcycles so consumers understand classification, power, and licensing/insurance requirements. House Substitute No. 1 for House Bill 407, related to the Hazardous Substance Cleanup Act and brownfields, would shift funding for brownfield cleanup from the original realty transfer tax approach to a dedicated share of the hazardous substance cleanup fund and raise civil penalties for fraudulent acts. The committee also approved the June 18, 2026 minutes once quorum was reached. Most of the meeting centered on House Substitute No. 1 for House Bill 233, as amended, a large-load/data center bill intended to protect ratepayers from costs tied to massive new electricity users. The sponsor and Public Advocate said PJM’s warnings about a coming reliability backstop auction made it urgent to establish a Delaware framework now, requiring large energy users to sign utility agreements, cover their share of transmission, distribution, and capacity costs, and comply with curtailment and other protections. Supporters from environmental groups and some labor and business voices said the bill was needed to prevent cost shifts to households and small businesses, while opponents argued it was being rushed, could deter investment, and might unintentionally affect other industries; several asked for more time and clearer definitions. No vote was taken in the portion provided. The committee also took up House Bill 470, which would authorize Delmarva Power, with PSC approval, to build and operate utility-owned battery storage and spread costs across the customer base. The sponsor and Delmarva said the bill would improve reliability quickly and help avoid outages, while the chair expressed concern that the state had not yet fully studied whether utility-owned or competitively procured storage is the best model, noting a recent SEU storage study and broader policy questions. Supporters said utility storage could be deployed faster and help with peak shaving, while others urged a competitive process; the transcript cuts off before any final action on HB 470.

Transcript Highlights:

• we provide to our Medicaid recipients does cover a comprehensive package of mental health, behavioral
• So with that $126 million, we were able to have sustainable funding for key services.
• So with that $126 million, we were able to have sustainable funding for key services.
• So this was not something that was not known because it was not sustainable funding.
• Of those dollars to date, there is a... ...non-sustainable funds.

Summary: The Health Care Budget Subcommittee held a panel discussion on Florida’s mental health and substance abuse system, with representatives from DCF, AHCA, two managing entities, and two providers describing how the state’s behavioral health network is funded and operated. Members focused on the implementation of prior legislative investments, especially the $50 million in recurring funding from Representative Maney’s bill and the earlier $126 million community behavioral health appropriation. Witnesses said the newer funds were used mainly for crisis beds, discharge planning, outpatient services, regional collaboratives, and a USF Marchman Act report, while the larger behavioral health appropriation supported CAT, FACT, FIT, forensic teams, residential and outpatient services, and crisis care, with most dollars going directly to services and only a small share to administration. A major theme was access to crisis care and the role of mobile response teams, 988, and central receiving facilities in diverting people from Baker Act admissions and reducing readmissions. DCF and providers said mobile response teams have expanded, are being used to de-escalate crises and connect people to care, and have shown strong diversion results and reductions in Baker Acts in some regions. Members also asked about waitlists, children in crisis, and how to handle people without housing or support; providers said discharge planning is individualized but often constrained by homelessness, transportation, and a lack of safe placements, and several witnesses identified housing as one of the biggest barriers to recovery and stability. The committee also examined provider sustainability, reimbursement, and funding gaps. Witnesses described delays caused by contract timing, cost allocation rules, and Medicaid reimbursement rates that do not always keep pace with labor and operating costs, especially for smaller providers and rural networks. DCF and AHCA said managing entities can provide advances, retroactive rate adjustments, and technical assistance, and that Medicaid managed care plans have network standards and complaint/dispute processes. Members raised concerns about a reported $7 million loss in federal non-sustainable funds, provider closures, and whether there is a formal ombudsman process for disputes; DCF said the federal reductions were known and tied to one-time funds, and that the department generally handles provider issues informally while working with managing entities to preserve continuity of care.

Transcript Highlights:

• First, we're going to hear the governor's fraud package that is kind of sprinkled throughout a lot of
• We are going to give the first hour for the governor's fraud package, and then we hope to move at 9:15
• ,</c><00:01:31.040><c> and</c> to the governor's fraud package, and to the governor's fraud package,
• </c><00:04:46.640><c> modern</c> expertise needed to sustain modern expertise needed to sustain modern
• anti-fraud package along with two<00:10:56.280><c> enterprise</c><00:10:56.800><c> proposals.

Committee: House Fraud Prevention and State Agency Oversight Policy

Transcript Highlights:

• So altogether, when we get everything in the package It's $2,600.
• So, we tried to kind of package them and bring those resources to them in the regions across the route
• So, we tried to kind of package them and bring those resources to them in the regions across the route
• We have some ideas again for the sustainable plan design.
• That second bullet point: if we could, I think a cola is a sustainable plan design if you can plan for

Committee: House A&B Education Subcommittee

Transcript Highlights:

• whatever... ...of people who don't have the education, the skills, or whatever, to move forward to a sustainable
• I'm hoping, is going to change the trajectory of the folks in our state to more folks who have a sustainable
• cases don't have... ...now moving to adults who, in some cases, don't have the ability to be able to sustain
• That package has gone into DOL.
• Also, funding flexibility, and there are some other things that the waiver package did that was submitted

Committee: All ALC-HOSPITAL, MEDICAID, & DEVELOPMENTAL DISABILITIES STUDY SUBCOMMITTEE

Transcript Highlights:

• This renovation represents a holistic approach to sustainability.
• We are able to sustain operations; however, if we have to maintain a debt service, we are likely not
• This project isn't just about infrastructure; it's about investing in a sustainable future for the next
• The proposed project is part of a larger package of projects. MnDOT and St.
• of funding Rural Development will provide until they receive our comments, and they get a funding package

Bills: HF2418 , HF1666 , HF232 , HF344 , HF402 , HF431 , HF468 , HF547 , HF583 , HF1476 , HF1711 , HF2787 , HF2788 , HF3207

Committee: House Capital Investment

Transcript Highlights:

• of this committee, the Joint Legislative-Executive Committee on Budget Transparency and Fiscal Sustainability
• in the state budget. ...long-term sustainability in the state budget.
• Then I'm going to talk a little bit about what fiscal sustainability means to us.
• when we sort of ask the question: Is a state on a fiscally sustainable path?
• So secondly, I'm going to move on to talking about fiscal sustainability.

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

Summary: The committee held its first meeting, with co-chairs and members introducing themselves and staff outlining the committee’s statutory charge under the 2026 supplemental operating budget. Staff explained that the committee is tasked with studying budget transparency and fiscal sustainability in two phases: first, revenue growth, spending assumptions, statutory cost drivers, and carryforward/maintenance levels; and later, staffing, overhead, performance management, and public reporting tools. The committee also discussed its goals, with members emphasizing a shared factual understanding of Washington’s fiscal situation, the causes of projected structural deficits, and possible paths to a more sustainable operating budget. Staff then gave a detailed operating budget basics presentation. They reviewed the size and composition of the operating budget, explaining that most spending is concentrated in grants and client services, salaries and benefits, and goods and services, with K-12 education, DSHS, the Health Care Authority, DCYF, corrections, and higher education making up most NGFO spending. They also walked through the distinction between constitutional, federal, statutory, and discretionary spending; the role of caseload and per-capita forecasts; how maintenance level and policy level budgets are built; and how the four-year outlook works, including revenue forecasts, reversions, budget stabilization account reserves, and the official outlook adoption process. Members asked several questions about what is or is not included in the outlook, especially future collective bargaining agreements, health care inflation, court-ordered liabilities, and whether the budget could better separate mandatory from discretionary spending over time. Staff said some of those questions would require follow-up and noted the existence of an outlook accuracy report. The committee then heard from Josh Goodman of the Pew Charitable Trusts, who introduced Pew’s state fiscal work and its role as the nonprofit partner supporting the committee. He said Pew would help analyze long-term fiscal sustainability, reserve policies, recession preparedness, and practices from other states, and would draw on its 50-state data and subject-matter experts. No votes were taken and no formal actions were reported at this meeting.

Transcript Highlights:

• </c><00:20:08.640><c> Sustaining</c> pie giftter, and a volunteer.
• Sustaining pie giftter, and a volunteer.
• It produces legacy and it has been sustainable and deserves recognition and money.
• It produces legacy and it has been sustainable and deserves recognition and money.
• The letter is in your package, members. Are we good? Okay. Okay. All right.

Committee: Senate Environment, Climate, and Legacy

Transcript Highlights:

• BIFMA and its members are committed to advancing sustainable practices across the industry.
• for sustainability a nonprofit I<01:11:08.239><c> co-founded</c><01:11:08.760><c> 41</c><01:11:09.239
• </c><01:11:11.920><c> on</c> mission of co-creating sustainability on mission of co-creating sustainability
• We work closely with business to develop win-win-win sustainability solutions that benefit business,
• We work closely with business to develop win-win-win sustainability solutions that benefit business,

Committee: House Environment and Natural Resources Finance and Policy

Transcript Highlights:

• Such fertilizers are key to a more sustainable and environmentally sound agricultural system.
• This was done separately as a unique, separate decision package.
• We did do other fees in our maintenance level decision package.
• I just kind of painted the picture of a profit loss that's not sustainable.
• The fee raises from the Department of Health are so large that they are not sustainable.

Summary: The committee heard public testimony on Senate Bill 5816, which would add juice grapes to Washington’s Agricultural Marketing and Fair Practices Act. Staff explained that the bill would allow juice grape producers to form an accredited association to negotiate with processors under the same timelines used for pears, and the prime sponsor said the measure was intended to help growers obtain fairer prices. A grape grower testified that Washington producers face a small number of buyers, little real negotiation, and prices far below New York’s, arguing the bill would give growers a way to bargain collectively. The public hearing closed with 47 people noted in support and one in opposition. The committee then heard Senate Bill 5971, which would create a green fertilizer incentive program for low-carbon nitrogen fertilizer production and use in Washington. Staff described the bill as directing WSDA to establish the program, adopt rules by 2028, and report to the Legislature, with costs shown in the fiscal note. The prime sponsor and several supporters, including Atlas Agro, a port representative, labor, NRDC, WSDA, the League of Women Voters, and the Washington State Potato Commission, said the bill could reduce greenhouse gas emissions, support local manufacturing and jobs, stabilize fertilizer supply and prices for farmers, and help Washington compete for federal clean hydrogen tax credits. WSDA said the program was implementable with consultation and that the Climate Commitment Act could be a funding source, though it noted rulemaking costs. The committee then held a work session on commercial shellfish fee assessments after the Department of Health adopted major fee increases for shellfish licensing and certification. Shellfish growers and association representatives said the increases—described as ranging from roughly 233% to 789% overall, with some individual licenses rising much more—would hit small and family farms hardest, could force closures, and were based on a fee structure they said is outdated and not tied well to production. DOH explained that the program has long relied on general fund support, that federal shellfish safety requirements must be maintained, and that the new fees are intended to move the program toward full cost recovery after years without increases. The department said it had used a phased approach, reopened rulemaking to look for a fairer structure, and would continue working with industry and the Legislature; no vote was taken during the work session.

Transcript Highlights:

• Okay, and so the fee is to make the program self-sustaining?
• But yes, it's supposed to be self-sustaining, so no general fund for that. Okay, thank you.
• Emily, is there a policy reason or a sustainability—any kind of reason... Thank you, Mr. Chair.
• Emily, is there a policy reason or a sustainability, any kind of reason why there's such a variability
• We offer them counseling, special packaging, appointment reminders, and referrals.

Summary: The committee first heard House Bill 2437, which would put the Department of Health’s authority to accredit opioid treatment programs into statute and allow the department to set a fee to cover the cost of those services. The prime sponsor and DOH said the bill would preserve a service that is especially important to tribal and rural providers and would be self-sustaining rather than supported by the general fund. Members asked about the relationship between DOH and HCA and whether the bill would duplicate existing authority; staff and the department said DOH already performs the accrediting role and the bill mainly formalizes that authority and fee-setting power. Public testimony on the bill was then closed. The committee then held an extensive work session on the federal 340B drug pricing program and later opened public testimony on House Bill 2145, which would prohibit manufacturers, distributors, and third-party logistics providers from restricting 340B drug acquisition or delivery and from requiring claims or utilization data as a condition of access. Committee staff and NCSL gave background on how 340B works, recent growth in the program, contract pharmacy issues, and state efforts in other jurisdictions. Testimony on HB 2145 was sharply divided: hospitals, community health centers, tribal representatives, contract pharmacies, and labor groups said the bill would protect safety-net providers, rural access, HIV and behavioral health services, and tribal programs from manufacturer restrictions; business groups, pharmaceutical companies, and employer coalitions argued the program has expanded beyond its original intent, lacks transparency, shifts costs to employers and taxpayers, and should be addressed through federal reform instead. No vote was taken in the excerpt. Finally, the committee heard House Bill 2155, which would bar non-human entities from using nursing titles such as RN, APRN, or LPN or otherwise implying they are licensed nurses. The prime sponsor said the bill is intended to protect patients from being misled by AI systems and to preserve transparency and public safety as health care technology expands. The Washington State Nurses Association testified in support, saying AI can be useful but should not replace nurses or be presented as a licensed professional. A member asked about enforcement and liability, and staff said they would follow up on those details.

Transcript Highlights:

• The funding plan of the bonding package.
• But we do need predictable and sustainable funding to not only support the industry but certainly the
• We would ask you to consider this bonding package, which will go a long way. to predictable, sustainable
• Creating a task force and looking at what other states are doing will help ensure that we have sustainable
• Additionally, we are focused on helping the state meet its fuel and sustainability goals.

Transcript Highlights:

• Packaging and paper compose about 40% of the weight of those products.
• We already know that two-thirds of our mostly recyclable packaging and paper waste end up in the trash
• A needs assessment would evaluate the quantity and types of packaging and paper waste generated statewide
• , Maryland, and Minnesota, have enacted product stewardship laws that shift the cost of managing packaging
• And finally, point-of-use filtration is the gold standard for sustainability.

Committee: Joint Joint Committee on Bonding, Capital Expenditures and State Assets

Summary: The Joint Committee on Bonding, Capital Expenditures and State Assets held a hearing on S. 2542, the Mass Ready Act, the Healey-Driscoll administration’s environmental bond bill. Secretary of Energy and Environmental Affairs Rebecca Tepper and Undersecretary Jen Sullivan described the bill as a $3 billion resilience package to protect drinking water, farms, fisheries, roads, bridges, parks, and communities from flooding, heat, drought, wildfires, and other climate impacts. They highlighted major authorizations for flood and coastal resilience, DCR infrastructure, drinking water and wastewater upgrades, PFAS remediation, open space and land protection, food security infrastructure, and a new Resilience Revolving Fund for low-cost loans to municipalities, tribes, and water districts. Committee members asked about project lifespans, flood and salt marsh permitting, wastewater and combined sewer overflow funding, parkway maintenance, land acquisition priorities, Quabbin stewardship, and how the revolving fund would be capitalized and administered. The administration said the fund would be modeled on the Clean Water Trust, use existing trust resources rather than new fees, and could later support special obligation bonds; they also said the bill would streamline certain permitting and improve flood-risk disclosure and climate-related building standards. Many witnesses urged the committee to strengthen the bill’s funding levels or add related policy provisions. Labor, contractor, and plumbing groups supported creating a water reuse and graywater recycling commission, saying it could conserve water, reduce stormwater and sewer burdens, and create skilled jobs. Boston Harbor Now asked for higher authorizations for the Municipal Vulnerability Preparedness program and resilient coast work, plus permitting reforms for nature-based and waterfront projects. The Massachusetts Rivers Alliance backed the bill but also urged inclusion of drought-management legislation, a water reuse commission, a statewide flood buyout program, and more support for community resiliency. Environmental justice advocates from Green Roots called for dedicated funding for outdoor and indoor air quality monitoring and indoor air quality improvements in schools and public housing, while conservation and tree advocates sought larger investments in urban forestry, local nurseries, and workforce training, along with clearer language to ensure municipal reforestation funds go to cities and towns. Agricultural and food system witnesses emphasized the importance of the bill’s food security and farmland provisions. The Southeastern Massachusetts Agricultural Partnership and the Mass Food System Collaborative supported the $125 million food security infrastructure grant program, saying it has funded critical facilities and equipment for farmers, fishers, processors, and food access organizations, but warned that without the bill there could be a funding gap in fiscal year 2027. They also supported farmland protection and asked for more funding for agricultural capital programs, used-equipment eligibility in grant programs, and a next-generation farmer fund. Water utility representatives said the bill still falls short of the state’s long-term drinking water, wastewater, and stormwater needs, citing EPA estimates of nearly $37 billion in needed investments over 20 years and urging dedicated recurring funding and broader eligibility for climate resilience grants. No votes were taken at the hearing.

Transcript Highlights:

• much. already don't get paid that much money, and the benefits is one of the bigger pieces of the package
• So we've got to have a benefits package and a lifestyle package that makes them want to stay in this
• Now, one of the better things was that they were getting a good benefit package, and now if the benefit
• package has to go up, then it takes away from their... to go up, then it takes away from their cost
• As much as my injury may not be sustained that much, but in terms of my mental capacity, you're telling

Bills: SJR 1 , SB 9 , SB 40 , SJR 36 , SJR 1 , SJR 5 , SB 9 , SB 40 , SR 61 , SR 91 , SR 97 , SR 103 , SR 104 , SR 112 , SR 115 , SR 116 , SCR 16 , SB 26 , SB 26

Transcript Highlights:

• the House on this line item and whether that's still needed as part of your economic development package
• Line 116 may need further discussion on finalizing the economic development package and how that fits
• Chairman, line 242 is one that's funding the medical school as part of the medical school package.
• Hold on one second. ...42 is one that's funding the medical school as part of the medical school package
• If that comes as part of the ongoing package, but most of it is building out the IT systems.

Bills: SB152 , SB145 , HB2 , SB190 , HB247

Committee: Senate House Appropriations & Finance

Summary: The committee first set aside Senate Bill 247 because the Attorney General and bill sponsor were not present. It then heard Senate Bill 190, which would authorize bonding to help Healer Regional Medical Center in rural southwest New Mexico replace an aging linear accelerator used for cancer radiation treatment. The sponsor and hospital representatives said the equipment is at end of life and that replacing it would keep patients from having to travel long distances for care. The committee adopted a friendly amendment adding an emergency clause, but members then questioned the financing, noting the $5.7 million cost, the lack of local matching funds, and the fact that the equipment’s useful life is only about 10 years while the proposed bonds would run for 30 years. After extended discussion about interest costs and timing, committee members explored alternatives to reduce the state’s borrowing burden, including using existing rural health care funds, federal grant money, or structuring a county lease arrangement rather than issuing bonds. The bill was left pending while staff and the sponsor were asked to look into those options and report back. The committee also briefly heard from the Department of Justice about concerns raised by the Public Education Department regarding Gallup-McKinley and online learning companies; DOJ said investigations were ongoing but it could not say whether a lawsuit would be filed. Members expressed concern about possible large liabilities and discussed bringing the Attorney General and PED Secretary back in executive session. The meeting then shifted to House Bill 2 and related budget matters. Staff walked members through numerous line items, flagging some as potentially duplicative, unspent, or in need of further review, including attorney general litigation funds, rural health, education, transportation, tourism, energy, and economic development items. The committee adopted the “grow” spreadsheet after members said they had reviewed it, and then discussed reserve targets. Staff presented several scenarios to raise reserves from about 26.7% toward the 27.5% target, including cuts to natural resource, environmental, higher education, and transportation appropriations. Members generally favored a flexible “scenario five” approach and were reluctant to sweep older capital outlay projects immediately, preferring to wait until the capital outlay changes bill is resolved. The committee planned to continue the budget discussion the next morning.

Transcript Highlights:

• We need to find more ongoing, sustainable solutions for communities to truly rebuild and adapt to the
• It concludes that California's long-term resilience depends on sustained investments in risk reduction
• But we are charged with having to have a conversation of how do we sustain this.
• But here's what's really important to note: even with modern tools, sustaining and expanding this work
• We do strongly support a wildfire risk reduction legislative package this year.

Summary: The joint Senate hearing focused on California wildfire resilience funding, the SB 254 report on natural catastrophe resilience, and how the state should better prioritize community hardening, recovery, and financing. Senators emphasized that catastrophic wildfires have driven major property losses, insurance cancellations, and affordability problems, and several members argued that prevention and home/community hardening should receive far more attention than they have to date. Members also raised concerns about CEQA and other permitting delays, the need for ongoing rather than one-time funding, and whether the state should rely more on the General Fund, utilities, or other sources such as polluter-pays approaches. The Legislative Analyst’s Office said the state has appropriated about $4.7 billion for wildfire resilience since 2018-19, with most funding going to forest health, fuels reduction, and related landscape work, while only about $65 million has been specifically targeted to community hardening. LAO also noted that future one-time funding is likely to decline, that GGRF revenues may be limited under the new cap-and-invest structure, and that maintenance costs for treated areas could be substantial over time. Senators pressed LAO on why wildfire resilience is not more often funded through the General Fund and on whether current spending matches the scale of the risk. Cal Fire’s State Fire Marshal described the state’s community wildfire preparedness strategy, centered on home hardening, defensible space, and neighborhood-scale mitigation, and said the SB 254 report aligns with Cal Fire’s direction. He said California has roughly 4 million homes in the wildland-urban interface, most built before modern wildfire-resistant standards, and highlighted recent streamlining that approved 383 fuels-reduction projects in under 30 days during an emergency proclamation. Cal OES described the AB 38 pilot and FEMA hazard mitigation work, saying federal approval delays have been a major barrier and that the state has hardened 155 properties so far through the pilot, with many more in process. The Wildfire and Forest Resilience Task Force said the state has coordinated more than $6 billion in state and federal investments, treated over 700,000 acres annually, and is shifting toward more regional, data-driven planning and block grants. Task force staff and Cal Fire both said they are moving beyond simple acreage metrics toward models that estimate avoided loss and community risk reduction, but acknowledged major data gaps on parcel-level home hardening and defensible space. No formal votes were taken; the hearing was informational, with members discussing possible future legislation and budget changes, including home inspection reforms and continued CEQA streamlining.