Transcript Highlights:

• And we will now turn to our first item for discussion. We will begin with Exposition Park.
• So with both of those at $96.5 million, that's our first request.
• At science, my first science fair was there. My first oboe scholarship was won at Exposition Park.
• I'm happy to take a first stab at that and let Mr.
• Thanks, and I would add that this is not the first time we've talked about this issue.

Keywords: 987, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• That was the first session in 2019, and the last one was of course last year.
• It's the first session.
• She went first, and then she spoke with deep conviction and much emotion.
• She went first and then she session.
• </c> she was going to lose after her first she was going to lose after her first term.<00:25:49.520><

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• So we will begin with the first bill on the list.
• The first element has to do with reporting.
• The first element has to do with reporting.
• First, police officers are not teachers. They carry firearms.
• So the first dish. Amy, go ahead. Wrap it up for us. Thank you. So the first issue is revenue.

Bills: HB2220 , HB2362

Committee: House Community Safety

Keywords: criminal justice training commission, CJTC, law enforcement training, peace officer certification, decertification, corrections officer certification, tribal police certification, police accountability, police oversight, public safety, academy training, in-service training, continuing education, use of force, misconduct investigations, disciplinary hearings, administrative law judge, hearing panel, law enforcement standards, background investigations

Transcript Highlights:

• We have testimony first from the State Foundation on Culture and the Arts.
• We have testimony first from the State Foundation on Culture and the Arts.
• our state was the proud when our first our state was the first<00:15:40.480><c> to</c><00:15:40.639>
• And I first to enact 1% for art law.
• And testifying first is the State Foundation on Culture and the Arts.

Keywords: 912, senate, all

Summary: The committees met on a 3:00 p.m. agenda that included House Concurrent Resolution 94 and several gubernatorial nominations. HCR 94, which asks the governor to proclaim Hawaii a Purple Heart State on August 7, 2025, drew support from the Hawaii Veterans of Foreign Wars and no opposing testimony. The chair recommended passage as is, and the committees adopted the recommendation without objection. The bulk of the meeting focused on nominations to the King Kamehameha Celebration Commission and the State Foundation on Culture and the Arts, along with one nomination to the Medical Advisory Board. Nominees and supporters emphasized experience, continuity, and service: Dana Alla Lopez, Beverly Lee, and others described prior commission work; Janet Sato and Marcia Deutsch highlighted long involvement in arts education, grants review, and public art; and Randall Francisco stressed arts advocacy and accessibility. Testimony in support also came from commission staff, the Association for Hawaiian Civic Clubs, the County of Kauai Office of Economic Development, the mayor of Kauai, and others. One nominee, Judy Kvel Kovville, had support from the Department of Transportation. Several committee members raised broader questions about sustaining arts funding amid possible federal cuts and changes in state project financing that could reduce revenue under the 1% for art law. The nominees for the arts-related posts said they were open to exploring new funding sources, including private philanthropy, community support, and learning from other states. After discussion, the committee voted to advise and consent on all listed nominations—GM506, GM507, GM508, GM556, GM654, GM740, GM742, and GM743—with no votes or reservations, and the meeting adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• This should happen on the first break of an illness.
• Recently, for the first time, a team recognized that my son was not...
• My son and I have a relationship, first time ever.
• First, I want to thank Ms.
• The first item is for funding transfer authority.

Keywords: 988, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Question, first of all. Vice Chair? Question, first of all, for the LAO.
• First of all. Vice Chair? Question, first of all, for L.A.O.
• And, you know, sort of setting an overall cap would create a first-come, first-served sort of situation
• So I'll take the first question.
• So first, just to frame this a bit, first, our revenues have increased 30% from 74 billion in fiscal

Summary: The subcommittee first heard an informational overview from the Governor’s Office of Service and Community Engagement (GoServe), including California Volunteers, the Office of Community Partnerships and Strategic Communications, and the Youth Empowerment Commission. GoServe reported strong participation in programs such as California Service Corps, College Corps, Youth Service Corps, Climate Action Corps, and the new men’s service challenge. Testimony emphasized enrollment, retention, and completion outcomes, outreach results, and efforts to reduce administrative costs. The Department of Finance said the administration supports the programs but has already made reductions to help address the budget deficit, while the LAO said it had no new recommendations on the informational item. Committee members raised questions about program scale, demographics, and effectiveness, especially for Climate Action Corps and whether the programs are duplicative of existing volunteer opportunities. One member criticized the programs as too fragmented and costly, while others asked for more data on who is being served and whether the programs increase actual participation in state services. GoServe said it would follow up with demographic and regional impact information. The committee also discussed the men’s service challenge, which GoServe said has formed partnerships with organizations such as YMCAs and Big Brothers Big Sisters and has already attracted more than 2,000 participants. The item was informational only. The committee then heard a BOE overview and a budget request to implement SB 293, which gives wildfire-affected families additional time to claim intergenerational Prop. 13 property tax transfers. BOE requested $154,000 for guidance, public materials, and inquiry response, explaining that the work is urgent and tied to disaster relief in Los Angeles County, especially Altadena. The LAO had no concerns, and Finance had no comment. Members asked how many cases might be affected and whether more funding would be needed later; BOE said the full number is not yet known and that future requests are possible. The committee also heard BOE’s IT modernization proposal for the state-assessed property tax system, a 30-year-old mainframe replacement costing $3.2 million in 2026-27 and $3.1 million in 2027-28. BOE and Finance supported the project as necessary, while the LAO said it had no concerns but urged a high bar for new IT spending. Members generally supported modernization but cautioned about implementation risk. Finally, CDTFA presented an overview and two policy proposals. The department described administering 42 tax and fee programs, collecting $98 billion in FY 2024, and improving administrative efficiency. Members then discussed local sales tax tools and revenue-sharing agreements, with concerns raised about transparency, consultant-driven tax allocation disputes, and the impact on local communities. CDTFA and the LAO explained that local jurisdictions control how district sales tax revenues are spent and noted the Legislature could revisit the statutory cap on local add-on sales taxes. The committee then heard CDTFA’s proposal to treat all delivery network companies as marketplace facilitators so they must collect and remit sales tax on delivery-app orders. CDTFA said the change would resolve confusion, shift compliance from thousands of small restaurants to a few large platforms, and raise about $44 million annually. Several members questioned whether the proposal would effectively raise consumer costs and whether it would create a competitive advantage or disadvantage among delivery platforms. The item remained under discussion, with no vote taken in the transcript.

Transcript Highlights:

• But, you know, the first...
• Who wants to go first? Sure.
• And this is the first row of the figure.
• So that’s the first point.
• I’m going to jump first.

Summary: The Assembly Budget Subcommittee on Climate Crisis, Resources, Energy, and Transportation heard an informational hearing with Secretary Garcia and CalEPA-related departments on the administration’s budget proposals and related environmental programs. Secretary Garcia highlighted CalEPA’s work on methane reduction, community air protection, water infrastructure, Exide cleanup, safer pesticide alternatives, Prop 4 implementation, and Bay-Delta water quality, while emphasizing the impact of federal rollbacks and the need for flexible state response. Members raised broader policy concerns about the polluter-pays principle, special fund vacancies, and whether the state is maintaining sufficient staffing and enforcement capacity, especially after recent fee increases. A major portion of the hearing focused on landfill support, response, and enforcement, particularly subsurface elevated temperature events at Chiquita Canyon and El Sobrante. CalEPA requested $5.1 million and 12 positions to improve monitoring, technical response, coordination, and enforcement across CalRecycle, CARB, DTSC, the Water Board, and OEHHA. Assembly Member Schiavo described severe community impacts from Chiquita Canyon and pressed for stronger state action, more transparency, and accountability from landfill operators; Assembly Member Rogers emphasized that accountability must mean forcing operators to take preventive measures and bear the costs. Agency staff said the proposal would help augment current response efforts, support local enforcement agencies, and improve early detection, while acknowledging that the causes of set events are not fully understood and may involve factors such as lithium-ion batteries, oxygen intrusion, and gas extraction practices. The committee then heard an update on the Safe and Affordable Drinking Water program and the effects of the new cap-and-invest structure. State Water Board Chair Joaquin Esquivel reported that the program has reduced the number of Californians without safe drinking water from 1.6 million to about 600,000 since 2019, while also bringing 320 systems back into compliance and distributing $1.8 billion in drinking water grants. The Legislative Analyst’s Office explained that under SB 840, SAFER is now in a lower funding tier, which could reduce annual proceeds from the prior $130 million level to a projected $92 million in 2026-27 and delay funding until later in the year. Members expressed concern that this deprioritizes rural drinking water needs, while the board said it would continue using SAFER’s flexible funds for emergency water, technical assistance, and construction, and would keep pushing consolidations and other long-term solutions for the remaining failing systems.

Transcript Highlights:

• I mean, anyone you want to think should be the first. first witness or just comment on this?
• The providers are often the first point of contact.
• We have to remember that the first point of.
• First of all, as the chair would call up...
• Anyone particularly to call as the first witness, or? Oh, Ms. Jones has a question for you first.

Bills: HB47 , HB1552 , HB1686 , HB1953 , HB2151 , HB2355 , HB2582 , HB2697 , HB2895 , HB3073 , HB3418 , HB47

Committee: House Criminal Jurisprudence

Keywords: sexual assault, victim rights, forensic examination, medical care, trauma-informed care, crime victims compensation, evidence retention, child sexual abuse material, child pornography, digital services, reporting requirements, children's protection, sex offender registration, indecent assault, educator-student relationship, criminal justice, legislation, crime victims, compensation fund, information disclosure

Transcript Highlights:

• Okay, so we'll do the JDC, the Judiciary Committee bills only first. Uh, first up is SB 2149.
• </c> uh bills only first. uh bills only first.
• First up on a law enforcement officer. First up on 2203<00:12:14.960><c> is</c> >> Chang. Okay.
• c> Uh first up on 2438 Uh first up on 2438 is<00:47:49.720><c> David</c><00:47:50.160><c> Matsumiya,<
• First, the Attorney General's one.

Keywords: 912, senate, all

Summary: The Judiciary Committee heard several Senate bills. SB 2149 would exempt paternity proceedings involving allegations of domestic abuse from mediation and clarify the domestic abuse mediation exemption in divorce cases. The Department of the Attorney General and the Hawaii State Coalition Against Domestic Violence supported the measure but recommended technical and conforming changes, including updating references from HRS Chapter 584 to 584A and aligning the language more closely with the Uniform Mediation Act. Members discussed whether the bill’s wording could limit who may bring a support person to mediation, and the chair suggested the intent was to preserve survivor choice while avoiding ambiguity. No vote was taken in the portion heard. SB 2203 would create an offense for law enforcement officers using masks or personal disguises. The Office of the Public Defender, ACLU of Hawaii, Legal Clinic, and many other supporters argued the bill would improve transparency, accountability, and public trust, while still allowing safety exceptions. Law enforcement agencies, including the Department of Law Enforcement, Honolulu Police Department, and the Honolulu Prosecutor’s Office, raised concerns about operational needs, undercover and auxiliary units, body cameras, and possible supremacy clause issues if the bill is aimed at federal officers. The chair noted the bill appeared likely to move forward and asked agencies and advocates to work on possible amendments; testimony count was reported as 114 in support, 3 opposed, and 2 comments. SB 2251 would appropriate funds for the victim witness assistance program in the City and County of Honolulu Prosecuting Attorney’s Office. The prosecutor’s office supported the bill, saying it would replace shortfalls from declining federal funding and help maintain victim services and rights information. A former program director also testified in support. When asked, the office said it would not object to a simple reporting requirement. The committee then moved on to SB 2311, which would address claims against the state and add reporting and timing requirements; the Department of the Attorney General testified with concerns and recommendations, and members began questioning current practices for handling claims and settlements.

Transcript Highlights:

• So up first, we're going to have DEED.
• So up first, we're going to have DEED.
• </c><00:01:01.399><c> we're</c> of this in advance so up first we're of this in advance so up first we're
• first first $43,000<00:12:43.000><c> of</c><00:12:43.199><c> wages</c><00:12:43.959><c> um</c><00:12
• their first grant, Mr.

Committee: Senate Jobs and Economic Development

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• </c><00:31:13.679><c> home</c> people uh both with first-time home people uh both with first-time home
• </c><00:41:51.640><c> Column</c> the First Column and the First Column the First Column and the First
• Senator Abeler, I saw your hand first, so Senator Abeler, I get to have the first question under this
• Senator Abeler, I saw your hand first, so Senator Abeler, I get to have the first question under this
• Senator Abeler, I saw your hand first, so Senator Abeler, I get to have the first question under this

Committee: Senate Housing and Homelessness Prevention

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• So we'll begin first with our special order business.
• First, fiscal irresponsibility.
• First of all, Mr.
• I believe in the First Amendment, but I also know that the First Amendment does not allow victims to
• We are often the first point of contact screening people into buildings and the first line of defense

Committee: Senate Public Safety

Summary: The committee met without a quorum and operated as a subcommittee while hearing several bills, with members repeatedly noting that votes would be taken later once a quorum was established. Early in the meeting, the committee heard SB 1446 on parole en banc review and SB 1278 on elderly parole eligibility for certain sex offenses. SB 1446’s author said the bill would give commissioners more discretion in en banc review, make votes public, and allow referral for sexually violent predator evaluation in certain cases; supporters included the California District Attorneys Association, while opponents from Uncommon Law, the Ella Baker Center, and public defender groups argued it would add confusion, create constitutional and litigation concerns, and duplicate existing safeguards. SB 1278 would exclude certain rape, child sexual abuse, and habitual/serial sex offense convictions from elderly parole eligibility; district attorneys and police chiefs supported it as a victim-safety measure, while civil rights and defense organizations opposed it as unnecessary, costly, and inconsistent with evidence on aging and recidivism. Both bills were discussed but not voted on due to the lack of quorum. The committee then heard SB 1354, which would bar out-of-state military or law enforcement personnel from entering California to perform such functions without the Governor’s permission. The author and supporters framed it as protecting state sovereignty and limiting unauthorized armed incursions; the committee accepted an amendment removing a criminal penalty and leaving enforcement to the Attorney General. No opposition testimony was offered, and members expressed support, but no vote was taken because quorum was still lacking. The committee also heard SB 926, a bill to fund implementation of Proposition 36. Supporters, including sheriffs, district attorneys, probation officials, and the League of California Cities, said local agencies need funding for treatment, supervision, and administration; opponents argued the proposal was fiscally reckless, lacked accountability, and overemphasized incarceration. Amendments removed a specific appropriation and shifted funding decisions to the budget process, but the bill was also held pending quorum. Later, the committee heard SB 874, which would require background checks for unlicensed providers of Medi-Cal behavioral health treatment services, create a stakeholder workgroup, and direct DHCS to issue guidance and report on program integrity. Support came from local health plans and behavior analysis providers, who said the bill would improve safety and consistency; there was no opposition testimony. The committee then heard SB 1210, which would extend CalGang oversight and due process protections to local gang databases as well as shared ones. Supporters described privacy abuses, racial disparities, and personal harm from inaccurate gang labels; law enforcement opposition argued the bill would impose CalGang standards on informal investigative files and would significantly change the gang definition. The author said the bill closes a loophole and preserves prior reforms, but no vote was taken. The committee also began hearing SB 1019 on creating a California Cargo Thief Task Force, with strong support from BNSF, trucking, shipping, port, and supply-chain representatives who described organized, multi-jurisdictional cargo theft and rail sabotage; no opposition was heard, and members indicated support, but action was deferred pending quorum. The meeting then moved to SB 1217 on a non-consensual intimate image clearinghouse, with the chair and author describing privacy-related amendments and the bill’s focus on helping survivors remove exploitative images; the transcript cuts off as that presentation began.

Transcript Highlights:

• Just a little bit of background: my family comes first; it always comes first.
• I've been here since 2009, which is when I first came to the Senate.
• Before I do that, let me first of all introduce you to Emily.
• I think it's the first year that feels like a post-COVID year.
• I have a brief first question.

Committee: Senate Senate Judiciary

Transcript Highlights:

• One of the first things I came across was a testimony.
• The first phase, I would say, is as, as... The first phase, I would say, as Mr.
• Let's go back to 1996 when they first brought wolves in here.
• This is the first time we cut one open. So that's the first time I'd seen this was last summer.
• Spring of 96 when we lost the first two.

Keywords: 989, all

Summary: The committee heard a presentation from University of Idaho representatives on the university’s land-grant mission and its role in federalism, followed by detailed overviews of the College of Agriculture and Life Sciences and the College of Natural Resources. Speakers described the Morrill, Hatch, and Smith-Lever Acts, the university’s history, and examples of research, extension, and workforce training in agriculture, engineering, law, forestry, fire science, and youth programs such as 4-H. They highlighted facilities and programs including research stations, the Idaho Center for Agriculture, Food and the Environment, the deep soil ecotron, the Wildland Fire Center, the experimental forest, and the policy analysis group, while also noting the impact of federal and state funding delays and cuts on staffing and research capacity. Committee members asked about several current issues, including quagga mussels, screw worm, chronic wasting disease, and the effects of funding cuts. University officials said they were not actively researching some of those wildlife and livestock disease issues but were willing to help if capacity and funding allowed. They also said budget reductions had caused real losses, including layoffs and reduced programs, and that federal grant delays had disrupted research timelines. The committee also raised questions about conflicts of interest and university employees’ outside work; the university said it has annual conflict-of-interest and conflict-of-commitment training and review procedures. The committee then heard from Bonneville County Sheriff Sam Hulse and the Idaho Sheriffs Association on the federal 287(g) immigration partnership program. Hulse argued that participation should remain voluntary and locally controlled, describing the different 287(g) models, the training and liability concerns, and the distinction between local law enforcement and federal immigration enforcement. He said Idaho agencies already cooperate with ICE in other ways and that mandatory participation could create staffing, legal, and community-trust problems. Members asked about costs, liability, detention standards, and whether deputies lose local control under task force arrangements; Hulse said the answer depends on the specific model and operation, and he emphasized the need for local discretion. Later, the committee took testimony on the long-running bighorn sheep and domestic sheep conflict affecting western Idaho grazing allotments. Idaho Wool Growers representatives and affected ranchers described the history of state legislation, federal litigation, and the closure of grazing areas after bighorn sheep transplants, which they said cut livestock operations in half and caused major financial and personal hardship. They argued that the state and federal agencies had not lived up to assurances that permittees would be held harmless, and they urged continued attention to the issue. No formal votes or committee actions were taken in the portion of the meeting provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• &gt;&gt; First<00:04:14.400><c> of</c><00:04:14.560><c> all,</c> &gt;&gt; First of all, &gt;&gt; First
• Uh, first we would go after the companies and hopefully they pay for it first.
• That's why we they pay for it first.
• Again, we were the first ones.
• Again, we were the first ones.

Bills: HB0116 , HB0056

Committee: House Minerals, Business & Economic Development

Keywords: water rights, beneficial use, industrial production, hydrogen, applications, public welfare, carbon capture, energy standards, public utilities, environmental regulation, state law, 916, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Excuse me, sign in first. She can speak first; she's already signed in.
• Similarly, First Things First survey found that more than one-third of working parents left their jobs
• I will tell you this: I respect the First Amendment.
• First of all, congratulations for getting your first bill.
• At least the first general order. At least the first general order. Go Army. Go Army?

Committee: House Government

Keywords: 1182, all

Transcript Highlights:

• We'll start with the 9:45 first.
• The first being uh written testimony.
• </c> asset forfeiture in the first place. asset forfeiture in the first place.
• </c> about his first amendment rights? about his first amendment rights?
• The first circuit.

Keywords: 912, senate, all

Summary: The Judiciary Committee heard testimony on HB 126, which would change civil asset forfeiture law. The Attorney General’s Office, Honolulu Police Department, and county prosecutors opposed the bill’s proposed SD1, arguing that requiring a criminal conviction and changing how forfeiture proceeds are distributed would weaken or effectively end the tool, create fiscal and law enforcement problems, and make it harder to address organized crime or cases where an owner cannot be identified. The Public Defender’s Office, Community Alliance on Prisons, Drug Policy Forum of Hawaii, and other supporters argued the measure would improve transparency and accountability, protect property rights, and reduce abuses that disproportionately affect low-income people. The chair questioned law enforcement about fairness, storage of seized property, and access to counsel, and the discussion focused heavily on whether forfeiture should depend on a conviction. No vote was taken. The committee then heard HB 280, which would make the Community Outreach Court permanent and appropriate funds for it as a division of the First Circuit district court. The Department of the Attorney General and Judiciary supported the concept and described the court’s success in helping people resolve cases, clear license stoppers, recall bench warrants, and access services, but suggested amendments to remove the Attorney General from the bill’s definition and funding mechanism. The Public Defender, Department of Human Services, mental health and substance use advocates, neighborhood and community groups, and others strongly supported the bill, emphasizing its benefits for people facing housing instability, behavioral health issues, and transportation barriers. No opposition was voiced, and no vote was taken. The committee also heard HB 370, which would increase partial public campaign financing for elective offices. The Campaign Spending Commission supported the original bill and asked the committee to restore the original percentage amounts, keep the proposed funding increases, and reinstate funding for two additional full-time staff positions. Supporters said the public financing system has not kept pace with inflation and needs modernization to be viable; a few testifiers opposed the measure. The committee reported 30 in support, two opposed, and one comment, and then moved on without a vote. Finally, HB 371 was heard, a campaign contribution bill that would bar state and county contractors, grantees, and certain related persons from contributing during the contract period. The Campaign Spending Commission said the bill is intended to address pay-to-play concerns and false-name contributions, while the State Procurement Office raised concerns about the burden of requiring agencies to provide contract information for all contracts regardless of dollar value. The testimony ended with the commission saying it was working with procurement and the Attorney General on implementation details; no vote was taken.

Transcript Highlights:

• First up, we and it has multiple parts.
• First up, office of Hawaiian affairs. First up, office of Hawaiian affairs.
• First representative, go ahead.
• </c> first representative. first representative. Go<01:45:48.800><c> ahead.</c> Go ahead. Go ahead.
• And it's, by the way, the first four... the first nine do not just include housing; it also does apply

Committee: House Judiciary & Hawaiian Affairs

Keywords: 910, house, all

Summary: The committee heard testimony on House Bill 2592, which would clarify the powers of the Mauna Stewardship and Oversight Authority regarding land use on Mauna Akea and related property transfers. The Department of Land and Natural Resources supported the rural property transfer but objected to language transferring conservation district use permits, saying CDUPs normally run with the land rather than being assigned to specific telescopes or observatories. The University of Hawaiʻi and the observatories generally supported the bill but urged clearer language, especially on the transfer of real property assets, related obligations and liabilities, and the inclusion of milestones for the transition. Office of Hawaiian Affairs supported the bill’s overall intent but warned that some language could be overbroad and might improperly waive future beneficiary claims. Several testifiers opposed the measure, arguing it ignored DHHL lands and beneficiary rights, while others supported it as a way to clarify the authority’s role. Members questioned DLNR about the practical effects of transferring CDUP responsibility, and the committee emphasized that the bill was narrowly focused on specific land. The committee then took up House Bill 2593, which would authorize the Mauna Stewardship and Oversight Authority to extend existing leases and subleases for up to 10 years. The authority explained that the bill does not itself extend any lease, but instead gives the authority discretion to initiate a transparent public process if extensions are needed. The University of Hawaiʻi supported the concept but said the timing of any extension matters and noted possible legal requirements under state law. The observatories also supported the bill, describing it as a flexible tool during a broader transition process and noting that the authority has held many public planning workshops. Opponents, including Native Hawaiian and community testifiers, argued that the conservation lands should receive the highest protection, that the community had not consented, and that the observatories have had decades to plan ahead. One testifier urged the bill be deferred or killed for lack of clarity. In response to questions, the committee clarified that the bill only authorizes a process and does not itself extend leases, and that any extension would require public participation. The final measure discussed in the excerpt was House Bill 2047, relating to the AHAPU advisory committee. The discussion focused on the committee’s administrative relationship to the Department of Land and Natural Resources and whether DLNR should oversee basic legal compliance issues such as Sunshine Law and legislative reporting. DLNR explained that the committee is administratively attached to the department, which provides support on human resources, procurement, and legal questions, but that the committee itself generally handles its own operations. The department said it would route compliance questions to its attorneys and implement their advice. The hearing then moved on to House Bill 2231, which would transfer appointment authority for island burial council members from the governor and Senate to the Office of Hawaiian Affairs board of trustees. OHA said it generally supported the change for geographic moku representatives, since it already nominates candidates for those seats, but expressed concern about taking on appointment authority for the large landowner seats because that role is less directly tied to its statutory duties.

Transcript Highlights:

• First, we have Brian Clark, our budget chief. First, we have Brian Clark, our budget chief.
• The first is Hope Florida, a pathway to possibilities, which is spearheaded by our First Lady, Casey
• Also, our First Lady pathway, we're a pathway for Patriots.
• First of all, since it's the first big meeting on budget, I want to thank you for the last few years.
• My first question is for Director Hatch.

Summary: The Health Care Budget Subcommittee met to organize the new term, take roll, and hear introductory presentations from the six agencies under its jurisdiction: the Agency for Health Care Administration, Agency for Persons with Disabilities, Department of Children and Families, Department of Elder Affairs, Department of Health, and Department of Veterans’ Affairs. The chair outlined the committee process, including assigning members to review agencies and make budget recommendations. Each agency head gave a high-level overview of their budget, staffing, major programs, and priorities, with recurring themes including Medicaid, long-term care, disability services, child welfare, mental health, aging services, public health, and veterans’ health care. Several agency leaders highlighted recent initiatives and funding priorities. AHCA emphasized Medicaid managed care, provider regulation, Hope Florida, hospital-at-home, and cancer-related efforts; APD discussed iBudget services, Hope Florida, a managed-care pilot, online applications, and forensic care costs; DCF focused on child protection, foster care, adult protective services, food/cash/medical assistance, mental health, and opioid treatment; Elder Affairs highlighted Alzheimer’s services, community-based senior care, guardianship, ombudsman services, and disaster outreach; DOH covered cancer innovation, maternal telehealth, cybersecurity, HIV/hepatitis/syphilis screening, and school nursing; and Veterans Affairs described benefits and health care access for veterans, long-term care, and federal reimbursement. Several speakers also raised concerns about rising costs, provider rates, disaster response, and access to services. The committee heard two public comments from disability advocates about Medicaid redeterminations affecting iBudget waiver recipients and provider payment delays. In response, AHCA and APD said they were coordinating on data sharing, early outreach, escalation processes, and efforts to reduce disenrollments and make recertification smoother. Members then asked questions about provider rates, opioid settlement spending, managed care quality measures, pediatric rare disease grants, group home transparency, senior outreach, ABA services moving into managed care, annual Medicaid recertification, veterans’ service utilization, waiting lists for elder services, and prevention spending. No formal votes were taken during the meeting.

Transcript Highlights:

• This is my first time testifying before you, my first time being on this side of the table.
• But we first have to really invest.
• When you first started asking your question, that was the first example that came to my mind as well.
• Well, first of all, the U.S.
• The first one is the last one.

Committee: House Budget

Keywords: 959, house, all