Transcript Highlights:

• to pass any ordinance to—there's a long list of new responsibilities in their rates and fees and budgets
• , creation, adoption, implementation of capital budgets and capital improvement plan, board policies
• Are you aware that in the city of New Orleans' most recent operating budget, they've allocated about
• Representative Green: So in that budget, I would agree with you that it's there, but also even on the
• Hey, what were you explaining when you said the budgets were like 20 million and 17 million?

Bills: HR192, HR193, HR194, HCR80, HCR81, HCR82, HCR83, HCR84, HCR85, HR188, HR189, HR190, HR191, SB134, SB140, SB281, SB331, SB384, SB389, SB415, SB451, SB458, SB479, SB504, SB523, HR38, HR96, HR160, HCR31, HCR61, SCR19, HB316, HB549, HB578, HB646, HB748, HB798, HB824, HB988, HB989, HB1001, HB1032, HB1081, HB1108, HB1129, HB1140, HB1157, HB1186, HB1192, HB1195, HB1198, HB1222, HB1244, SB73, SB89, SB128, SB149, SB191, SB196, SB238, SB318, SB340, HB225, HR1, HR17, HCR5, HCR4, HCR47, HCR32, HB362, HB893, HB990, HB1007, HB1153, HB1243, HB12, HB42, HB205, HB222, HB267, HB324, HB325, HB350, HB478, HB610, HB617, HB745, HB749, HB752, HB797, HB807, HB821, HB896, HB979, HB992, HB1000, HB1024, HB1050, HB1166, HB1172, HB1173, HB1207, HB1218, HB1223, SB162, SB349, SB350, SB382, SB383, SB127, SB244, SB256, HB911, HB306, HB366, HB1161, HB1230, HB59, HB481, HB772, HB897, HB1003, HB1008, HB1112, HB1180, HB1189, HB181, HB1118, HB901, HR20, HR74, HB284, HB393, HB458, HB459, HB525, HB577, HB582, HB605, HB614, HB682, HB733, HB773, HB864, HB996, HB1035, HB1058, HB1082, HB1113, HB1234, HB1240

Keywords: ACOG, maternal health, healthcare professionals, patient-physician relationship, obstetrics, gynecology, condolences, military service, veteran, community, memorial, visual acuity, student health, de-identified data, longitudinal analysis, education policy, property rights, carbon dioxide sequestration, expropriation, Landowner Bill of Rights

Transcript Highlights:

• How many of those are budgeted or not budgeted?" "Those 12 are budgeted.
• How many of those are budgeted or not budgeted? Those 12 are budgeted.
• All allocated positions. All allocated. We have about 2,300 allocated positions. Okay.
• And we budget positions; we're budgeting the positions we're allocated.
• We're budgeting the positions we're allocated and the funding we have to budget, but sometimes we don't

Summary: The committee heard budget presentations and took executive recommendations on several Department of Human Services divisions, including Aging, Adult and Behavioral Health Services; Children and Family Services; County Operations; Developmental Disability Services; and Medical Services, with most divisions showing little or no significant change in total appropriations. Staff and agency witnesses repeatedly explained that many large appropriations are maintained for flexibility, federal matching requirements, or contingency needs, even when actual spending is much lower than the authorized amount. Members also raised concerns about staffing vacancies, long-vacant budgeted positions, and the use of excess appropriation authority across DHS. In Aging, Adult and Behavioral Health, members questioned federal funding levels for mental health and substance abuse grants, the status of senior centers and Meals on Wheels, the Medicaid tobacco settlement program, community alcohol safety grants, and the veterans mental health grant. Agency officials said federal block grants are largely committed, that senior center funding had been delayed by shutdown timing but was now back on track, that the tobacco settlement program had been moved internally within DHS, and that the veterans mental health appropriation remains unfunded. Senators also criticized the adequacy of support for seniors and asked for more detail on how transportation, meal services, and local contributions are funded. In Children and Family Services, members asked about rising appropriation levels, foster care and adoption subsidies, professional fees, the number of children in foster care, and the Children’s Trust Fund. DHS said increases reflect added flexibility for residential treatment, adoption subsidies, and prevention services, while the foster care population has remained fairly steady at about 3,400 children. The Children’s Trust Fund was described as supporting primary prevention programs such as Baby and Me and community schools, and members asked whether it could be administratively combined with other efforts. Questions also covered TANF subgrants, with DHS explaining that it had reduced outside subgrants after discovering over-obligation and was rebuilding reserves. In County Operations, members focused on the summer EBT program, SNAP employment and training, the farmer’s market program, and the state’s TANF reserve position. DHS said summer EBT is still being funded through temporary appropriations because it is a newer program, SNAP employment and training is largely federally funded and may expand under a pending policy change, and TANF reserves were drawn down after prior over-obligation but are now being stabilized. In Developmental Disability Services, members asked about vacancies, human development center staffing, facility construction funds, and the Booneville work program, and DHS said the program has reopened and staffing recruitment continues. In Medical Services, members asked about FMAP, the Our Kids B CHIP program, school-based Medicaid reimbursements, nursing home distress funds, and several large appropriation lines that far exceed actual spending; DHS said these are maintained for claims payment, nursing home receivership contingencies, and other flexibility needs. Each division reviewed was adopted by executive recommendation after questions concluded.

Transcript Highlights:

• So the May revision follows through with the governor's budget commitment to balance the budget over
• That would be budgeted as $25 million within CNRA's budget, $25 million within WCB's budget, and $75
• some context, the Governor's Budget assumed roughly $3.77 billion in both the current year and budget
• Budgets are about prioritizing.
• We could change that allocation.

Summary: The hearing focused on the governor’s May Revision proposals for transportation, natural resources, climate, and related programs, with the Department of Finance and the LAO presenting competing views on the state’s fiscal condition. Finance said the budget remains balanced over two years, with major climate-bond, water, parks, transportation, DMV, and agriculture proposals, while the LAO argued the state still has a structural deficit and should reject or defer many new discretionary spending items, preserve reserves, and be cautious about ongoing commitments. The LAO specifically questioned the timing and scale of new spending for programs such as Clean California, Healthy Rivers and Landscapes, and the Golden Gate Fields acquisition, and urged more clarity on future obligations and revenue scenarios, including for the Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund. A major portion of the hearing was devoted to the Healthy Rivers and Landscapes proposal for Bay-Delta water quality implementation. Secretary Wade Crowfoot and Finance described it as an enforceable, science-based alternative to a more traditional regulatory approach, with the state’s $25 million request intended to support early implementation, monitoring, habitat restoration, and environmental flows. The LAO countered that the Water Board has not yet adopted the updated Bay-Delta plan, that the proposal may be premature, and that the Legislature should wait for more information on the state’s total funding commitment and the program’s long-term costs. Several members expressed support for the program as a way to reduce conflict and protect water reliability, while others echoed concerns about timing and fiscal exposure. The committee also examined the proposed $125 million Proposition 4 contribution toward acquiring the Golden Gate Fields property for a shoreline park and habitat project. State officials said the acquisition is a time-sensitive, once-in-a-generation opportunity, with an appraised value of $175 million and additional philanthropic and local funding expected to close the gap. Members questioned whether the project had gone through the usual competitive process, whether the site is the best use of scarce park bond dollars, and how public access, habitat, and disadvantaged-community priorities would be protected. The discussion ended without a vote, and the committee moved on to transportation items including Clean California litter abatement, the Games Route Network, homeless encampment coordinators, and DMV modernization and field office proposals, with LAO recommending rejection or delay on several of those requests as well.

Transcript Highlights:

• The enterprise shall allocate any amount of revenues remaining after allocating revenues pursuant to
• Tax credit for contributions to the enterprise; allocation notice rules... Allocation notice rules.
• The allocation notice shall specify the amount of tax credits allocated to the insurance company and
• The allocation notice shall specify the amount of tax credits allocated to the insurance company and
• each year has been allocated.

Keywords: 981, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Welcome to Assembly Budget. Full room here. Welcome to Assembly Budget Sub 4.
• The May revision follows through with the governor's budget commitment to balance the budget over both
• That would be budgeted as $25 million within CNRA's budget, $25 million within WCB's budget, and $75
• Budget assumed roughly $3.77 billion in both the current year and budget year.
• budget year.

Keywords: 988, house, all

Summary: The Assembly Budget Subcommittee heard the Department of Finance’s May Revision overview and the LAO’s budget assessment, then questioned administration officials on several natural resources and transportation proposals. Finance described the state’s improved near-term fiscal picture, but also highlighted continued budget balancing measures, including use of the temporary surplus holding account, climate bond spending, transportation and DMV/CHP augmentations, and changes affecting CEQA filing systems, water programs, CalRecycle, and food and agriculture. The LAO argued the budget still relies heavily on reserves and borrowing, recommended rejecting or delaying many new discretionary proposals, and urged caution about ongoing costs and future-year impacts, especially for the General Fund, Motor Vehicle Account, and Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund. A major portion of the hearing focused on the Healthy Rivers and Landscapes proposal for Bay-Delta water quality implementation. Secretary Wade Crowfoot and Finance officials said the $25 million request would support early implementation of an enforceable program combining environmental flows, habitat restoration, and scientific monitoring, with the State Water Board retaining regulatory authority. The LAO said the proposal was premature because the updated Bay-Delta plan had not yet been adopted and asked for more clarity on the state’s existing commitments and future funding expectations. Several members expressed support for the program as a way to reduce long-running conflict over water policy, while others echoed concerns about timing and fiscal exposure. The committee also examined the proposed $125 million Proposition 4 contribution toward acquisition of the Golden Gate Fields property for a shoreline park and habitat restoration. State agencies said the project had a completed appraisal, was moving through a rolling grant process, and would leverage philanthropic and local funding, while members questioned why it was being elevated ahead of other park and conservation requests and whether it was the best use of limited bond dollars. The hearing then turned to transportation items, including $40 million for Clean California litter abatement, $6.2 million for Caltrans homeless coordinators, $73.4 million in DMV/Motor Vehicle Account requests, and funding for the 2028 Games route network. The LAO generally recommended rejecting or delaying the Clean California and homeless coordinator proposals pending more information, while members debated the need to preserve essential CHP and DMV operations despite the Motor Vehicle Account’s structural imbalance.

Transcript Highlights:

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

Keywords: 988, house, all

Summary: The Assembly Budget Committee met to consider the 2026 Budget Act, which leaders described as the compromise budget expected to move to the floor later that evening. Opening remarks emphasized that the plan balances the budget over two years, reduces the structural deficit, and builds reserves, while also protecting core programs from federal cuts. Jason Sisney outlined the legislative budget plan, saying it uses higher-than-expected revenues and reserve balances to reject some proposed reductions and fund temporary restorations and new spending in areas such as education, child care, health care, housing, homelessness, and public safety. Department of Finance representatives said the administration appreciated the two-year balanced framework and the effort to address out-year deficits, while noting the plan includes additional spending and revenue changes. Sisney also previewed floor bills including AB 109, SB 110, SB 122, and SB 125, with SB 122 described as a modification to the tax credit proposal and SB 125 as the managed care organization tax proposal. Subcommittee chairs then described the major policy choices in their areas. Health chair Addis said the budget responds to federal health care rollbacks by protecting Medi-Cal, clinics, hospitals, dental care, and other safety-net services, while also supporting reproductive care, gender-affirming care, and county health systems. Education chair Alvarez highlighted increased school funding, expanded learning, special education, teacher support, community colleges, and a change to Cal Grant eligibility for older community college students. Other chairs emphasized child care expansions, homelessness and housing funding, prison closure and criminal justice savings, wildfire mitigation, county support for Medi-Cal and CalFresh administration, and accountability measures tied to homelessness and corrections spending. Several members also raised concerns or priorities, including the impact of the MCO tax on providers, the need for more support for local journalism, transit and climate funding, biotech and R&D incentives, and continued work on Prop 98 and long-term revenue solutions. No formal votes were taken in the portion provided, but members broadly expressed support for the budget framework and the need to continue negotiations with the administration before final passage. The committee discussion repeatedly framed the budget as a response to federal policy changes and a choice to protect vulnerable Californians while maintaining fiscal responsibility. The vice chair, citing LAO warnings about future volatility and limited reserves, pressed Finance on whether the budget represented a record-sized state budget and whether revenues were also at record levels, underscoring concerns about the state’s preparedness for a downturn.

Transcript Highlights:

• Work would be ongoing in the budget year and budget year plus one.
• So we increased the allocation, but still never actually finished spending the allocation.
• The first budget year savings item in the budget is item 46.
• It's not just budget math.
• So please protect our budget.

Summary: The hearing began with opening remarks on the Governor’s May Revision for child care and human services, with committee members and advocates stressing that the budget should not be balanced on the backs of low-income families, children, and providers. Legislative members and public witnesses strongly opposed the proposed suspension of the child care COLA, reductions to the Emergency Child Care Bridge Program, and the lack of codified rate reform tied to the alternative methodology. Several speakers also urged more support for providers affected by the Eaton fire and other disasters, and called for child care to be funded at the true cost of care and for additional slots to be restored. Administration, LAO, and Department of Education staff described the child care proposal as maintaining existing funding levels while adding administrative resources to prepare for federally required prospective payment changes and single-rate reform. The administration said the May Revision would suspend the 2025–26 COLA and reduce Bridge Program funding to align with utilization, while the LAO raised questions about the size and purpose of the proposed rate-reform and prospective-payment funding and recommended rejecting a Department of Technology exemption. CDE supported continued early education investments but said it would need additional resources if prospective pay were extended to state preschool, and it objected to a proposed reallocation of preschool funds for inclusive education grants. The committee then moved to the IHSS portion of the May Revision. DSS outlined five major proposals: capping provider work hours at 50 per week, eliminating IHSS for undocumented adults age 19 and older, shifting certain Community First Choice reassessment penalties to counties, reinstating the Medi-Cal asset test as a conforming IHSS reduction, and automating the termination of IHSS when Medi-Cal eligibility ends. DSS also discussed funding to implement a federal HCBS access rule and a separate reassessment of IHSS administrative methodology that found counties would need additional administrative funding. Finance said the proposals were intended to slow program growth and improve sustainability, while the LAO said it was still analyzing the package and raised concerns about implementation, county workload, and the potential loss of services. Committee members and public commenters criticized the IHSS cuts, especially the overtime cap and the elimination of services for undocumented adults and people affected by the asset test. Advocates argued that IHSS workers and recipients depend on these services, that county administration is already underfunded, and that the proposals could destabilize vulnerable consumers. The chair closed by saying the committee would continue to fight for child care and would not pause on child care, and the meeting recessed before moving on to the remaining May Revision items.

Transcript Highlights:

• The 2025 Budget Act allocated $390 million across these entities for programs such as establishing wildlife
• the state budget process that we're dealing with today.
• however prop 4 funding is only available remain to be allocated.
• Is that correct in this year's budget? In this year's budget for the GGRF component, yes.
• allocated.

Summary: The subcommittee began by announcing a change in the agenda order, moving item 6 ahead of item 1 and then item 7, and noting there would be no votes taken on any items that day. Item 6 covered a proposed operational efficiencies control section for the Natural Resources Agency that would let multiple departments jointly fund landscape-scale or multi-jurisdictional projects and allow Finance to transfer climate bond funds to a lead state entity. The LAO said the proposal was reasonable but suggested the Legislature consider requiring summary notification on how it is used; Finance said it would consider that request. Item 7 focused on the 2026-27 biodiversity and nature-based solutions spending plan. Finance and the Wildlife Conservation Board described the climate bond funding for habitat restoration, wildlife crossings, public access, tribal nature-based solutions, and related work, including $111 million proposed for WCB and $30 million for Salton Sea habitat and public access projects. The LAO supported the overall approach but flagged the San Andreas Corridor Program as an area where the Legislature may want to specify geographic priorities. Members discussed the pace of Salton Sea work and whether the proposed projects would count toward disadvantaged community goals. Item 8 addressed Cal Fire’s aviation contract and staffing needs for wildfire response. Cal Fire said year-round fire activity, a larger and more complex aircraft fleet, and labor market pressures justified the proposed contract increase, including more mechanics, pilots, and maintenance support. The LAO recommended approval, saying the proposal addressed health and safety concerns. Members asked about contractor staffing, competition in the bidding process, and future technology for early fire detection and suppression. The committee then took up item 1 on golden mussel containment. Fish and Wildlife described the invasive species’ spread in the Delta, the task force and response framework, and a request for eight new positions funded by Prop. 4 to support control plans, outreach, monitoring, research, and coordination with partners and law enforcement. Members pressed the department on whether the state should fund more direct decontamination infrastructure and grants to local water managers, and on the realistic goal of containing the mussel. The chair and several members emphasized the urgency of the threat and requested an itemized breakdown of the $20 million request. The hearing then moved to a broader LAO overview of wildfire prevention and response funding, where the LAO summarized the state’s funding mix and warned that ongoing wildfire resilience funding will likely decline as one-time bond and GGRF funds are exhausted, prompting discussion of long-term funding options and the balance between prevention, suppression, and community hardening.

Transcript Highlights:

• So we appreciate the opportunity to comment on this budget. ...budget act.
• This budget bill allocates $213 million for county Medi-Cal workload.
• And this budget does allocate a couple hundred million dollars, as I understand it, which I agree with
• And this budget does allocate a couple hundred million dollars, as I understand it, which I agree with
• Please keep this in the budget. We also $30,000. Please keep this in the budget.

Keywords: 987, senate, all

Summary: The Senate Budget and Fiscal Review Committee heard AB 109, the Budget Act of 2026, and related discussion of the legislative budget agreement. Committee staff and the Department of Finance described a two-year balanced plan with about $253 billion in General Fund spending, roughly $5.5 billion in higher assumed revenues than the May Revision, and about $36.5 billion in combined reserves. They said the package preserves or expands funding for schools and community colleges, child care, IHSS, Medi-Cal-related county administration, housing and homelessness programs, public hospitals, courthouse construction, and some criminal justice and prison-closure savings, while delaying or modifying several prior health care reductions and some Medi-Cal changes. Much of the member discussion focused on Medi-Cal, H.R. 1, and the impact on low-income and immigrant Californians. Several Democrats argued the budget protects vulnerable residents by delaying some cuts, funding county eligibility work, indigent care, public hospitals, and food banks, and rejecting the Governor’s IHSS cuts and asset-limit proposal. Republicans criticized the budget for assuming future revenues, relying on new taxes, and not doing enough to address the structural deficit or improve accountability. Members also raised concerns and support around homelessness funding, Prop. 36, judgeships and courthouse funding, transit and GGRF allocations, local journalism, Caltrans fleet spending, and a proposed “fair share” revenue measure that was not yet before the committee. Public testimony was largely supportive of the budget’s health and human services provisions, especially the rejection of IHSS cuts and the asset-limit proposal, and the inclusion of funding for child care, sickle cell centers, domestic violence services, trauma recovery centers, distressed hospitals, county eligibility work, and transit programs. Some witnesses representing hospitals and health plans cautioned about the effects of moving certain Medi-Cal populations to fee-for-service and about proposed tax changes affecting health care providers. The chair said revenue trailer bills were still being finalized and would likely come back later in the week; the committee then moved to public comment, with the chair limiting speakers to about one minute each.

Transcript Highlights:

• With respect to the department's budget, the proposed budget for fiscal year 2026-27 totals $3.2 billion
• The proposed budget includes four permanent positions and two one-year limited-term positions in budget
• Then we'll have to start asking for more through budget requests because no more would be allocated under
• More through budget requests, because no more would be allocated under the Prop 1 bond.
• They can only allocate to the 988 centers what they are given to allocate. Yes.

Keywords: 987, senate, all

Summary: The subcommittee heard updates from the Department of State Hospitals on its proposed 2026-27 budget, including a $3.2 billion total budget, patient-driven operating cost increases, savings in the IST solutions program, and progress in meeting the Stiavedi court-ordered 28-day treatment standard. DSH reported it has met court benchmarks, reduced the IST pending placement list from a pandemic high of 1,953 to about 250, and is now averaging about five days to initiate treatment. Members asked about the effects of Proposition 36 and SB 1323 on referrals, outside hospitalization costs, Medicare coverage, and whether IST solution funds were being overbudgeted; DSH said referrals are slightly down overall, outside medical costs are rising due to inflation and an aging population, and the IST savings reflect slower-than-expected activation of community programs rather than a service gap. The department also outlined proposed funding for electrical infrastructure upgrades at Napa and Patton, a feasibility study under SB 380 for transitional housing for the CONREP SVP program, and a dental services expansion at Metropolitan and Patton. The committee held those DSH items open after discussion. The Commission for Behavioral Health presented its role in overseeing the transition from MHSA to BHSA, including data, evaluation, transparency, grantmaking, and technical assistance. It described the new Innovation Partnership Fund, a statewide innovation grant program funded at up to $20 million annually for five years, with small and large grants, and said it had received strong interest ahead of the May 8 application deadline. Members asked about what qualifies as innovation, whether grants could be renewed, and how the state would ensure the program supports service delivery rather than general outreach or training. The commission also sought a liquidation deadline extension for up to $4.062 million in remaining Alcove Youth Drop-in Center funds so sites can finish implementation and Stanford can complete the final evaluation; that item was also held open. DHCS provided an overview of behavioral health policy changes under CalAIM and BH Connect, including peer support, mobile crisis, contingency management, traditional health care practices for tribal members, the access reform and outcomes incentive program, workforce investments, evidence-based practice expansion, IMD participation, transitional rent, and upcoming youth-focused guidance such as high-fidelity wraparound and activity funds. On BHSA implementation, DHCS said it is not tracking specific local program cuts, but is monitoring county plans and outcomes while noting that counties must still preserve Medi-Cal specialty mental health and DMC-ODS services. The department also discussed its H.R. 1 implementation strategy, including outreach, streamlined renewals, ex parte exemptions, and proposed clinic navigator and outreach funding to reduce Medi-Cal coverage loss, especially for people with behavioral health needs. In response to questions, DHCS said it has not produced a specific H.R. 1 impact estimate for county behavioral health populations, and later explained that counties can still use BHSA and other funding streams for prevention and early intervention while the state tracks impacts through integrated plans and new performance measures. The department also reported on BH-CHIP bond spending, saying it has awarded $5.8 billion for 437 infrastructure projects creating 546 new or expanded facilities and more than 9,553 residential beds, with tribal set-asides exceeding the original allotment.

Transcript Highlights:

• to the governor's budget.
• could add funding for the budget for these activities in the budget next year.
• Programmed into the budget, proposed budget. So first from the LAO, please.
• That's why we should support this allocation even in this challenging budget cycle.
• We hope that even in these difficult budget times this small request can be allocated to keep this important

Keywords: 988, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• The budget also prioritizes modernization and operational efficiency, allocating $228 million for 44
• Is the scholarship funding allocation a new budget line? Senator Burgess, you are recognized.
• We are increasing our base student allocation by 1.5% overall in this current budget.
• How is the base student allocation determined in this budget?
• We are increasing our base student allocation by 1.5% overall in this current budget.

Summary: The Senate opened with prayer, the Pledge of Allegiance, doctor and guest introductions, and then took up Committee Substitute for Senate Bill 168, the Tristan Murphy Act, on mental health. Senator Bradley described the bill as a major criminal justice and behavioral health reform measure that would expand pretrial mental health diversion, strengthen treatment-based probation conditions, broaden grant uses for mental health and substance abuse programs, add Hillsborough County to a forensic hospital diversion pilot, require certain DOC mental health evaluations, and create a Florida Behavioral Health Data Repository. Senators from both parties spoke in strong support, emphasizing treatment over incarceration, public safety, data collection, and the Murphy family’s role in advancing the bill. The Senate passed the bill 37-0 and then approved 37 co-sponsors. The chamber then received the Senate’s 2025-26 General Appropriations Bill, SB 2500, with Chair Hooper outlining a $117.4 billion budget that he said reduces spending, preserves reserves, and includes major investments in water quality, transportation, education infrastructure, and reporting requirements. Committee chairs summarized their portions: K-12 funding at $34.7 billion with increases for FEFP, scholarships, VPK, school hardening, and school safety; higher education at $11.5 billion with workforce, nursing, reading, autism, and student aid investments; health and human services with a $1.8 billion increase for Medicaid, mental health, opioid response, disability services, and veterans programs; criminal and civil justice at $7.6 billion for corrections, juvenile justice, law enforcement, courts, and judgeships; transportation/tourism/economic development at about $18 billion including roads, housing, Visit Florida, and cultural grants; and agriculture/environment/general government with major Everglades, water quality, citrus, food bank, and agency IT funding. Members then questioned several budget items, especially education funding formulas, the shift of scholarship dollars below the line, the impact on public school districts, AP/IB and other accelerated program funding, the APD wait list, opioid settlement spending, arts grants, and the My Safe Florida Home and condo pilot programs. Chairs generally said scholarship and accelerated-program dollars were being restructured for transparency and flexibility rather than cut, that school districts would still receive funding based on enrollment, and that APD and other human services issues would continue to be worked out in conference. The budget discussion concluded with remarks praising staff and noting a 4% across-the-board pay raise for state employees and targeted increases for law enforcement and firefighters, followed by a recognition for FAMU Day at the Capitol.

Transcript Highlights:

• These reflect errors in the budget change proposal.
• These reflect errors in the budget change proposal.
• As noted, the Budget Act moved some funds around, about 18 million of that was moved As noted, the Budget
• And then second point is the energy package from the Governor's budget: DSGS and DIBA allocations, the
• I'm here to support the Governor's proposed allocation, a Prop. 4 fund allocation for ports and offshore

Summary: The hearing was an informational budget session on energy agency proposals, with no votes taken. Early discussion focused on Proposition 4 climate bond implementation, including funding for demand-side grid support, offshore wind development, and transmission financing. The Department of Finance said the budget includes allocations for demand-side grid support and offshore wind, but not yet for the $325 million transmission financing piece pending a required study. The Legislative Analyst’s Office urged the Legislature to consider whether to wait on offshore wind funding, whether to keep shifting funds into demand-side grid support, and how to direct future transmission financing. Members also raised concerns about local technical assistance for offshore wind, Salton Sea priorities, and the need for more information before final decisions. The California Energy Commission and CPUC then reviewed the broader energy package. The CEC highlighted the demand-side grid support program’s growth, distributed energy backup assets, long-duration storage, hydrogen grants, and the SIRP clean energy reliability program. CPUC testimony emphasized affordability, wildfire mitigation costs, rooftop solar cost shifts, and efforts to reduce rates while maintaining reliability and clean energy goals. Members questioned CPUC staffing, delays in proceedings, coordination with the CEC and CAISO, and the impact of rate increases on customers. The agencies also discussed the AB 3264 transmission financing study, with CPUC saying work on the study had already begun and was on track for the July 1 deadline. Several trailer bill and implementation items were also discussed. The committee reviewed a proposal to extend the Deaf and Disabled Telecommunications Program surcharge, with members split over whether it should be handled in budget trailer bill language or policy legislation; the administration said the surcharge supports a critical program serving about three-quarters of a million Californians. The committee also heard a CPUC data-sharing proposal to allow nondisclosure agreements for transmission and reliability data, which members generally supported as a technical fix. DWR explained a proposal to clarify language for the Electricity Supply Strategic Reliability Reserve so it can potentially sell three gas-fired units it owns, and the CEC presented a federal transmission grant proposal tied to grid-enhancing technologies and ratepayer cost recovery. Finally, the committee discussed California Lifeline and possible broadband pilot reforms in light of uncertainty around federal Universal Service Fund support, with CPUC saying it is exploring a statewide standalone broadband option for eligible customers.

Transcript Highlights:

• situation overall, the budget overall, and the details of any aspects of the budget are things we're
• our budget as we move forward.
• The budget is proposing a $1.4 billion budget.
• I would characterize the syrup allocation, the plan is being kept whole in the Governor's budget, the
• So there's a redirection of funds, of allocations, and so the 2023 budget included $18 million. $18 million

Keywords: 988, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Budget Board, and I'll be presenting the Summary of Budget Recommendations for the Health-Related Institutions
• or $1.2 billion is allocated to the A&M system.
• Constitution requires the legislature to determine fund allocations every 10 years, and the current allocation
• HEAF allocations for the next 10-year allocation period beginning in fiscal year 2025. 2026 are contingent
• expenses, contracts, and M&O budgets.

Keywords: 1184, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• As you may recall, the SCFF was enacted as part of the 2018 Budget Act to allocate apportionments to
• The 2022 Budget Act agreement established a new funding floor starting in this budget year, 2025-26,
• Now onto the Governor's budget proposals.
• Yeah, or not allocated. Maybe increased as a result?
• Yeah, or not allocated, but approved maybe as a result of this.

Summary: The Assembly Budget Subcommittee on Education Finance held a hearing focused on California Community College budget proposals. Chair Alvarez opened by emphasizing the system’s role in access, transfer, workforce training, and serving more than 2 million students, while also noting persistent challenges in enrollment, persistence, transfer, and graduation. Public commenters and system representatives broadly supported COLA, enrollment growth funding, deferred maintenance, student support block grants, and additional flexibility for districts facing uncertainty. The first major panel covered the student-centered funding formula, COLA, and enrollment growth. The Department of Finance said the Governor proposes a 2.43% COLA ($230.4 million) and 0.5% enrollment growth funding ($30.4 million). The LAO said the COLA was reasonable and recommended funding at least the proposed growth amount, citing uneven enrollment recovery and regional differences. The Chancellor’s Office supported both proposals and asked for additional changes, including using the greater of current-year or three-year average for apportionments and lifting the 10% local enrollment cap, arguing these would better fund growing districts. Members questioned how the formula works, whether SCFF is improving outcomes, and how much additional funding would be needed under different growth scenarios. The committee then reviewed categorical program COLAs, Rising Scholars, career education proposals, IT proposals, and student housing. The Governor proposed a 2.43% COLA for selected categorical programs ($31.9 million). For Rising Scholars, the Governor proposed $30 million ongoing and removal of the cap on participating colleges; the LAO urged waiting for outcome data before doubling funding, while the Chancellor’s Office said the program is serving more students and supports equity for justice-impacted students. On career education, the Governor proposed $50 million for credit for prior learning and $50 million for a career passport; the LAO supported more reporting on credit for prior learning but recommended rejecting the career passport as too undefined, while the Chancellor’s Office supported both. On technology, the Governor proposed $162.5 million for a common cloud data platform and $168 million for a common ERP system; the LAO said both were premature or lacked sufficient planning and recommended rejection, while the Chancellor’s Office argued they would improve real-time data, security, and systemwide efficiency. The committee also heard an update on student housing: the administration said the 2024 shift to a lease-revenue bond model remains in progress for 13 approved projects, with 11 still active, and members asked about withdrawn projects and possible use of any returned funds. No votes were taken, and several items were held open for further discussion and May Revision updates.

Transcript Highlights:

• With respect to the department's budget, the proposed budget for fiscal year 26-27 With respect to the
• department's budget, the proposed budget for fiscal year 26-27 totals $3.2 billion, including state
• The proposed budget includes four permanent positions and two one-year limited-term positions in budget
• So they're ongoing budget requests.
• They can only allocate to the 988 centers what they are given to allocate. Yes.

Summary: The subcommittee heard presentations from the Department of State Hospitals (DSH), the Commission for Behavioral Health, and the Department of Health Care Services (DHCS) on budget proposals and implementation updates. DSH outlined its proposed 2026-27 budget, including funding for patient operating expenses, IST solutions savings, conditional release program costs, LPS bed allocation changes, electrical infrastructure projects at Napa and Patton, SB 380 transitional housing feasibility work, and expanded dental services at Metropolitan and Patton. DSH also reported that it has met court-ordered IST treatment benchmarks in the Stiavedi v. Clinton case, with average time to initiate treatment down to about five days and pending placements reduced to roughly 250, while noting that Proposition 36 could increase referrals and SB 1323 may divert some individuals earlier into community-based treatment. Members asked about rising outside hospitalization costs, Medicare enrollment, the timing and structure of capital projects, and whether IST solution funds are being fully used; DSH said the savings reflect slower-than-expected ramp-up of community programs and that the Central California FACT replacement program is still on track for January 2027 activation. The Commission for Behavioral Health described its role under the Behavioral Health Services Act (BHSA), including data, evaluation, grantmaking, technical assistance, and transparency work. It highlighted the new statewide Innovation Partnership Fund, a five-year, $20 million-per-year program with small and large grant categories; the first RFA drew strong interest, with more than 400 questions and over 1,000 bidders’ conference participants. The Commission also discussed a proposed extension to spend down about $4.1 million remaining for the Alcove Youth Drop-in Center grants so sites can finish implementation and Stanford can complete the final evaluation. Members asked about grant duration, whether projects can be renewed, what qualifies as innovation, and whether the fund could support service delivery rather than awareness campaigns or training; the Commission said awards are expected to be three-year contracts and that proposals must be new or meaningfully expanded approaches that support BHSA priority populations. DHCS reviewed major behavioral health changes under CalAIM and BH Connect, including peer support, mobile crisis, contingency management, traditional health care practices for tribal members, updated specialty mental health access criteria, and new substance use treatment standards based on ASAM’s fourth edition. DHCS reported strong contingency management results, with more than 13,000 members served and 95% testing negative for stimulant use during treatment, and said 21 Indian health care providers have been approved to offer traditional health care practices. It also described BH Connect initiatives such as the $1.9 billion access reform and outcomes incentive program, workforce investments, evidence-based practice expansion, IMD participation by four counties, and transitional rent services. On BHSA implementation, DHCS said it is not tracking individual county contract cuts but is monitoring county plans and statewide outcomes, while stakeholders raised concerns about local prevention and service gaps. DHCS also outlined its H.R. 1 implementation strategy, including outreach, streamlined renewals, exemptions for disabled, substance use, and medically frail individuals, and proposed clinic navigator and outreach funding; it said it has not yet produced a focused estimate of H.R. 1 impacts on behavioral health populations. The discussion ended with DHCS noting that B-CHIP bond funding has supported 437 infrastructure projects, creating 546 new or expanded facilities and more than 9,500 residential beds across the state.

Transcript Highlights:

• . 43% assumed in the budget.
• Once allocated.
• What happens to the allocated budget dollars that end up not going, say, you know, school district A
• The original 2022-23 Budget Act allocated $7.9 billion. There was a reduction.
• Our budget includes coaching.

Keywords: 988, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Were those funds allocated?
• I'm sorry, yeah, this is the budget. This is a page out of the budget that was just released.
• So, this budget allocation was done on that.
• The county does get an allocation. for Metro. And how is that money allocated?
• These budgets are not fat.

Bills: HB2065, HB2462, HB2621, HB3187, HB3539, HB3563, HB3726, HB4164, HB4207, HB4368, HB4706, HB4916, HB4950, HB4967, HB5177, HB4429, HB5597

Keywords: commercial vehicles, parking regulations, residential areas, local governance, land use, traffic safety, high occupancy vehicle lane, pregnant operators, transportation, parental rights, motor vehicle regulations, live video feed, state agency, transparency, public safety, regional transportation, mobility program, sales tax, public infrastructure, local government

Transcript Highlights:

• Chair: The Pre-K-12 Budget Subcommittee will come to order. Siena, please call the roll.
• amount in our budget.
• I hope in the future we can actually make it a part of our budget.
• amount in our budget.
• amount in our budget.

Summary: The Pre-K-12 Budget Subcommittee met with a quorum and considered three bills. HB 157, School Teacher Training and Mentoring Program, would create a Department of Education program allowing school districts and charter schools to place current or retired high-performing teachers in D- or F-rated schools as mentors, with a proposed $3,000 stipend per mentor per mentee. Members questioned the funding source and contract-time implications; the sponsor said the program would use previously decategorized education funds and that mentoring could be done within existing planning, before-school, after-school, or weekend time. An amendment clarifying that the bill would use a contract template rather than a DOE contract was adopted, and the bill was reported favorably. The committee then heard CS/HB 859, Exceptional Students and Video Cameras in Public Schools, which would require school boards to adopt policies for video cameras in self-contained ESE classrooms upon a parent request, with redaction of other students from footage. Public testimony strongly supported the bill, including emotional accounts from a parent of a nonverbal adult with autism who described past abuse in a classroom and from the Autism Society of Florida, which argued cameras are a necessary safety measure for vulnerable students and noted other states already allow or require them. Members emphasized student safety and the need to fund the policy, and the bill was reported favorably. Finally, the committee considered HB 561, Educator Certification, which aims to reduce barriers for experienced educators returning to the classroom by expanding temporary certificate eligibility to those with expired Florida certificates, allowing prior subject-area exam results to count for reinstatement, and updating references related to educator professional learning support. The sponsor said the bill preserves standards while making reinstatement more efficient and less costly. There was broad support from members, who noted the value of retaining experienced teachers, and HB 561 was also reported favorably. The committee then adjourned.