Transcript Highlights:

• So for the budget year, the reduction to the savings only reflects six months of implementation of Prop
• Kern County would be budget year plus two. Tahoe would be budget year plus three.
• As now we move on to Panel Five, various budget proposals, including those to implement recently enacted
• Budget proposals, including those to implement recently enacted legislation.
• Just to give you a budget update on that, I think we have a budget update on that.

Summary: The committee heard extensive testimony on Proposition 36 and its implementation, with judicial and budget officials describing it as a major shift from misdemeanor to felony processing for repeat drug possession and certain theft offenses. Witnesses explained that the law creates a treatment-mandated felony process that can lead to dismissal if a defendant completes treatment, but also requires evaluations, court monitoring, and potentially long, open-ended supervision. Judicial representatives said the new law is already generating large numbers of filings, creating workload, staffing, courtroom, and facility pressures, and that access to treatment beds, housing, and evaluation capacity is limiting participation. Several speakers emphasized that collaborative courts are effective but are not a perfect fit for Prop. 36 because those programs are typically probation-based and serve different risk/need populations. Court officials from San Bernardino and Orange counties said the impacts vary by county but are severe, with some counties seeing hundreds or more filings in a short period and others moving more slowly to build treatment infrastructure first. They argued that Prop. 36 is effectively an unfunded mandate unless the state provides more resources for judges, staff, facilities, treatment, housing, and supervision. The Legislative Analyst’s Office noted that Prop. 36 will reduce the Proposition 47 savings that fund mental health and substance use treatment grants, but said the near-term reduction is relatively modest and that the full effect will take time to appear because of the way those savings are calculated. Members of the committee repeatedly raised concerns that the state is underfunding the courts and counties needed to carry out the new law. The committee also reviewed the Governor’s proposed trial court operations budget, including a partial restoration of a prior $97 million cut and additional ongoing funding. Judicial branch officials said the restoration helped avoid furloughs, hiring freezes, and service reductions, and supported cybersecurity, technology, staffing, and records management. The LAO recommended that the Legislature seek more detail on how midyear restorations are handled and consider clarifying language for transferring unspent trial court trust fund monies to the General Fund. Finance said the flexibility in the ongoing funding was intentional and would be taken back for consideration. In a separate item, the committee heard testimony on a $6.3 million increase for Supreme Court and Courts of Appeal appointed counsel programs. Judicial officials and appellate project representatives said the system is facing a crisis because indigent appeals have risen sharply while the number of panel attorneys has fallen, leaving many cases waiting months for counsel. They argued the proposed increase would help but is still below what is needed to recruit and retain attorneys and prevent delays that affect criminal, juvenile, and child welfare cases. The committee also discussed the Tracy courthouse project in San Joaquin County, where local officials said reopening a courthouse closed since 2011 is necessary to serve a growing population and relieve overcrowding elsewhere. The LAO and Finance both noted the project is next in line under the facilities plan, though LAO suggested the Legislature could consider whether other facility priorities should come first.

Transcript Highlights:

• and an unfavorable budget.
• case implementation of some of these new requirements.
• Ending legislation from increasing the federal budget deficit requires the Office of Management and Budget
• As we saw in the 25-26 state budget, closing budget shortfalls without raising revenues results in discriminatory
• elements that will be implemented later on.

Keywords: 988, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Good morning, and welcome to Assembly Budget Subcommittee No. 4.
• To implement this budget change proposal and why? **John Parsons**, Department of Finance.
• **SB 707** for implementation. Sure.
• department will continue to implement it.
• As a result, we ask that DPR's full budget authority be reinstated so that the full implementation of

Keywords: 988, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• <00:04:49.440> collects management and budget collects management and budget collects information
• <00:05:10.039> the has determined if it has implemented the has determined if it has implemented
• We can say, yep, they implemented it.
• and which they haven't implemented.
• they haven't implemented which they haven't implemented<00:15:08.959> um<00:15:09.440> and<

Keywords: 1183, house

Summary: The committee heard House File 3, authored by Chair Nash, which would require the Office of the Legislative Auditor to produce an annual report for fiscal committees showing how well agencies have implemented prior audit recommendations, especially those related to financial practices, internal controls, and management. Nash said the bill is intended to give legislators a clearer, ongoing tool to evaluate agencies before making funding decisions and to help prevent waste, fraud, and abuse. He noted the bill would use existing audit information rather than create a new reporting burden, though he said it would deepen the review of implementation. Legislative Auditor Judy Randall testified that the Office of the Legislative Auditor already tracks implementation to some extent through annual information collected by Minnesota Management and Budget, but that current reporting is based largely on agency self-reporting and is not always independently verified. She said the bill would expand that work and provide the legislature with more useful accountability information. A representative from Americans for Prosperity also supported the bill, calling it a transparency and stewardship measure that would help taxpayers and legislators see whether agencies are following through on recommendations. Several members spoke in favor, describing the bill as a common-sense accountability measure and comparing it to audit practices in local government and private organizations. Nash and Randall also discussed Colorado’s similar process, where audit follow-up information is presented during budget hearings. Members raised concerns about fraud and inefficiency in state government, and Nash said the bill is meant to help lawmakers better protect taxpayer dollars. The committee voted to recommend House File 3 and re-refer it to the Committee on Ways and Means.

Transcript Highlights:

• The budget includes $2.7 million in the budget year, decreasing to $800,000 in 2027-28, to implement
• The budget also includes a few General Fund solutions to address projected budget shortfalls.
• And we did build into the budget $125 million for the budget year and anticipated savings, growing to
• The 2024-25 budget, we've provided where we met, like how far we got at Governor's Budget, but we're
• Proposition 36 passed overwhelmingly, yet this budget provides no path forward to implement it, and it's

Summary: The subcommittee heard May Revision presentations for the Office of Emergency Services, Judicial Branch, CDCR, and the Department of Justice, with the LAO offering comments and recommendations throughout. For Cal OES, the administration outlined funding for relocating the Red Mountain communications site, increased FEMA reimbursement authority, cybersecurity grants, next-generation 911 support, and a reduction to the Flexible Cash Assistance for Survivors of Crime program. Members raised concerns about VOCA backfill and disaster reimbursement, while the LAO recommended approving the 911 request with reporting, adding contingency planning for cybersecurity grants, clarifying the FEMA reimbursement language, and increasing reporting on emergency spending. For the Judicial Branch, the May Revision included funding for implementation of the Trial Nations Access to Justice Act, reductions tied to court facilities and employee benefits, and General Fund solutions such as a reduction to the pretrial release program, a reversion from the Trial Court Trust Fund, and elimination of the jury duty pilot program. The LAO cautioned that the pretrial reduction could affect detention and release decisions and recommended tighter legislative oversight over the trust fund transfer and reallocation language. Members questioned the impact of the pretrial cut, the lack of Prop. 36 court funding, and the rationale for the jury pilot elimination; the Judicial Branch said it was generally supportive of the budget as proposed. CDCR presented requests for roof repairs, fire alarm replacements, CalAIM-related costs, and trailer bill changes on incarcerated college students, mental health hiring, and tuberculosis testing, along with a planned prison closure by October 2026. The department also proposed reducing or delaying several items, including radio replacement, ADA improvements, COVID mitigation, and some facility upgrades, while adding a $125 million placeholder for consultant-driven operational savings. The LAO recommended rejecting or reducing several San Quentin-related proposals, questioned the staffing and contract medical requests, and urged more transparency on the consultant savings plan; members expressed concern about the realism of the savings targets and the potential legal or operational risks from delaying ADA and radio projects. For DOJ, the May Revision proposed ongoing funding and 44 positions to defend against federal actions, IT and accounting system upgrades, implementation funding for AB 1877, and a special fund loan. The LAO supported the KLETS connection but asked for a contingency plan if the new DMV link is delayed, noted that AB 1877 would not be fully implemented without additional funding, and recommended limiting and reporting on the federal accountability workload. Members questioned the size and permanence of the DOJ request, the use of the earlier $25 million special session appropriation, and the pace of federal litigation; DOJ said the new request would support ongoing litigation, expert assistance, and coordination across multiple cases and states.

Transcript Highlights:

• We have worked closely with the Governor to make some difficult choices, to implement some surgical budget
• So SB 111 is the budget bill junior to the 2026 Budget Act.
• This budget provides changes to AB 109, the Legislature's budget adopted earlier this month.
• Well, we're viewing the budget.
• And this budget and the sustainability of this budget confirms that.

Summary: The Assembly Budget Committee met to consider the final three-party agreement for the 2026-27 state budget and 19 implementing bills, including two budget bill juniors and 17 trailer bills. Committee leadership and administration officials described the budget as a balanced plan that reduces out-year structural deficits, maintains large reserves, and makes major investments in health care, education, housing, child care, public safety, and other core services while also responding to expected federal cuts and fiscal uncertainty. The Department of Finance outlined the package’s major components, including Medi-Cal adjustments, education funding increases, higher education changes, child care and human services updates, housing and homelessness funding, energy and transportation provisions, and tax and general government changes. Members asked questions about several provisions, including CSU enrollment targets and turnaround plans, the Prop. 98 settle-up mechanism, the plastics market development payment program, housing accountability measures, NextGen 9-1-1 implementation, and veteran services. Staff and administration witnesses explained that the higher education language is intended to improve campus-by-campus reporting and oversight, that Prop. 98 settle-up would be finalized later through the statutory certification process, and that NextGen 9-1-1 now includes one-time funding, quarterly reporting, an independent technical review, and a state audit. Members also discussed the HAP homelessness funding increase to $900 million and the balance between accountability and timely distribution of funds. The most extended exchange centered on comparisons between funding for veterans and Medi-Cal/immigrant health coverage. Republican members argued the budget spends far more on undocumented immigrant services than on veterans, while Democratic members and Finance staff responded that the comparison was misleading because many veterans’ services are federally funded and the state budget also includes dedicated veteran support. The chair and other members emphasized that the budget reflects difficult tradeoffs and that the package protects vulnerable populations, preserves health care access, and advances affordability. No final vote was described in the excerpt, but members indicated support for the overall package and said they would support it on the floor.

Transcript Highlights:

• The governor's budget does balance the budget in the budget year plus in the following year, and that's
• The budget act, as was mentioned earlier, imposes a $30 premium for these individuals to be implemented
• This is a key budget solution that helps balance the budget under the May Revision.
• So budget year plus one, we're looking at about 822,000 individuals at full implementation.
• future budget years.

Keywords: 988, house, all

Summary: The Assembly Budget Subcommittee on Health heard presentations on several May Revision proposals, beginning with an overview from the Legislative Analyst’s Office and the Department of Finance on the state’s budget condition and the administration’s efforts to reduce out-year deficits through a mix of revenue measures, fund shifts, and program reductions. The chair expressed support for some administration proposals, such as added health IT funding, county administration support, a delay in Medi-Cal cuts for some immigrants, and additional Covered California subsidy backfill, but also criticized proposed Medi-Cal premiums, changes to senior eligibility, the lack of a Medi-Cal dental solution, and other cuts affecting counties, workforce, and rural access. The LAO said the budget still relies heavily on reserves and borrowing and urged more reserves and caution on new commitments. The Department of State Hospitals presented several proposals, including reduced county bed billing authority, limited contract exemption authority for online clinical subscriptions, reversion of unspent prior-year funds, additional lease revenue authority for the Metro Central Utility Plant replacement, funding for electronic health record implementation, and a shift of workforce development costs to Behavioral Health Services Act funds. The department also described savings and realignments in its IST and CONREP programs, including making the Independent Placement Panel permanent and adjusting funding for jail-based competency treatment and conditional release services. Members questioned the BHSA workforce funding swap, and the administration said it was part of a broader General Fund offset strategy. The Emergency Medical Services Authority requested funding for statewide behavioral health crisis response guidance and for continued operation of its enterprise systems, and the Department of Managed Health Care sought funds to modernize its complaint system and claims settlement data systems. The largest debate centered on the administration’s proposed use of Behavioral Health Services Act revenues to offset General Fund spending and fund state-directed behavioral health programs. The Department of Finance said the proposal would support population-based prevention, workforce programs, mobile crisis services, and other state-directed uses, while the LAO said it was still reviewing whether the uses comply with Proposition 1 and whether the non-supplement and eligible-use requirements are met. The Commission for Behavioral Health strongly opposed proposed cuts to its Innovation Partnership Fund and community advocacy grants, arguing that both programs are central to community voice, culturally responsive services, and statewide innovation. Commissioners and many public commenters said the cuts would reduce grants to community-based organizations, tribal groups, veterans, LGBTQ communities, youth, and other underserved populations, and that the advocacy program helps communities participate in local planning and access services. The Department of Finance defended the reductions as a way to prioritize direct services and said the programs fit within Proposition 1, but members criticized the proposal as a midstream shift that would weaken community engagement and redirect funds away from prevention and advocacy.

Transcript Highlights:

• PLAN IMPLEMENTED THOSE.
• THE BIOMARKER IMPLEMENTATION REPORT.
• CONDUCT A COMPREHENSIVE REVIEW OF IMPLEMENTATION OF CHAPTER 24 REGARDING THE IMPLEMENTATION OF BIOMARKERS
• WE ARE WORKING IMPLEMENT THIS.
• Meyer: THAT WILL BE IMPLEMENTED.

Transcript Highlights:

• I'll be providing an overview of the Governor's budget proposal.
• It's a proposal from the Governor's budget to have professional development support the implementation
• This allocation is going to cover more implementation.
• To your point, this is for full implementation.
• two-budget act for food procurement grants.

Keywords: 988, house, all

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.
• We're also seeking the legislature's approval of additional resources in this year's budget to implement
• I want to say I understand my first three years were about cutting budgets, severely cutting budgets,

Keywords: 988, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• And we will start with our first issue: the Department of State Hospitals, budget overview, budget change
• The 2025-26 Governor's Budget proposes a total budget of $3.4 billion for the department, which is an
• The 2526 governor's budget proposes a total budget of $3.4 billion for the department, which is an increase
• And after some budget...
• , the implementation.

Summary: The hearing opened with remarks from the chair and members about recent federal cuts to public health, mental health, family planning, and Title X funding, with strong concern about the impact on California programs and providers. The committee then turned to the Department of State Hospitals, which presented its 2025-26 budget proposal of $3.4 billion, including new positions, capital improvements, and funding tied to increased patient costs and incompetent-to-stand-trial services. DSH reported major progress in reducing the IST waitlist and wait times, said it had met the court’s 28-day treatment benchmark for those without extenuating circumstances, and described workforce recruitment and retention efforts such as residency programs, fellowships, outreach, and hiring streamlining. Members asked about future IST referral trends, SB 1323’s effect on diversion and community treatment, and workforce lessons in high-cost regions; public comment urged reconsideration of county IST growth cap methodology in light of new criminal justice initiatives. The committee next received an informational overview of Proposition 1 and its changes to behavioral health funding and governance. The Legislative Analyst’s Office explained that Prop. 1 restructured county MHSA funding buckets, expanded the Commission for Behavioral Health, shifted prevention and early intervention responsibilities, and authorized a $6.4 billion bond, including $4.4 billion for behavioral health facilities through BHCIP. DHCS said it had released guidance for county integrated plans and was receiving extensive public comment. Members focused on BHCIP application requirements, especially letters of support and tribal projects, and raised concerns about whether DHCS’s implementation matched statutory intent. DHCS said it had authority to set application requirements and that tribal entities were treated differently because of sovereignty and funding structure. DHCS then updated the committee on BHCIP, the Behavioral Health Bridge Housing Program, and related bond implementation. The department said BHCIP had awarded about $1.7 billion across five rounds, with more than 130 projects and 223 distinct facilities funded, and that it was preparing to award the new bond funds after receiving nearly $8 billion in applications. The LAO’s assessment found that more than half of awards served at least 80% Medi-Cal enrollees, but also raised concerns that the regional allocation model could reinforce inequities, that the program had not sufficiently addressed the highest-need regions such as the southern San Joaquin Valley, and that smaller counties and less launch-ready applicants faced barriers. For bridge housing, DHCS said more than $1.1 billion had been awarded, serving over 5,000 people and supporting more than 2,000 operational beds, but the Governor’s budget proposes to eliminate Round 4 funding as the administration weighs other statewide investments and Proposition 1 implementation workload. Public commenters and members urged more accountability, better regional equity, stronger labor and community involvement, and caution about funding for for-profit psychiatric facilities. Finally, the committee heard on the Children and Youth Behavioral Health Initiative. CalHHS and DHCS described CYBHI as a broad prevention- and equity-focused effort with more than 1,300 organizations funded, over $2.1 billion awarded, and multiple work streams spanning schools, community programs, workforce, and digital supports. DHCS highlighted school-based services, the fee schedule rollout, and digital platforms BrightLife Kids and Soluna, which it said are reaching users statewide and providing low-barrier access to coaching and support. Members and public commenters raised concerns about delays in school fee schedule implementation, the large share of funding going to digital tools, the need for more in-person services, and whether the initiative is sufficiently tracking outcomes and equity impacts. No formal votes were taken during the hearing.

Transcript Highlights:

• The budget delays implementation of planned reductions in dental services and clinics to July 1, 2027
• budget.
• budget.
• Fund in the budget year for Medi-Cal to implement... ...to implement H.R.-1 requirements, $300 million
• That's not a budget bill, but we're in budget. Okay.

Keywords: 987, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• additional positions for DTSC to implement those reforms.
• We do have a budget proposal for forecasting dollars.
• First, for water reuse California on SB 31 implementation.
• Senate Budget Subcommittee No. 2 is adjourned.
• Senate Budget Subcommittee number two is adjourned.

Keywords: 987, senate, all

Summary: The subcommittee heard an extensive discussion on the Governor’s proposal to eliminate vacant positions across several environmental and natural resources departments, including Fish and Wildlife, Parks, the Coastal Commission/BCDC, DPR, DTSC, CalRecycle, and the State Water Resources Control Board. The Legislative Analyst’s Office explained that the JLBC had already not concurred with 650 of roughly 1,000 positions under review, citing concerns that many of the vacancies support core functions such as law enforcement, permitting, public safety, sea-level rise planning, and implementation of recently enacted laws. The Department of Finance defended the vacancy reduction exercise as a way to capture savings from a statewide pool of about 40,000 vacancies, arguing that departments need flexibility to manage operations and that some vacancies are used to cover operating costs or hard-to-fill roles. Several department representatives testified that the cuts would reduce capacity and could slow permitting or enforcement, though they said they would try to reclassify positions and prioritize the highest-need work. No vote was taken and all items were held open for a future hearing. Members focused heavily on the practical effects of the cuts. Senators questioned whether vacant positions should be treated as a budget savings tool, whether special-fund positions should be eliminated when they do not affect the General Fund, and whether long-vacant positions should simply be removed if they have not been filled for years. Fish and Wildlife and Parks described impacts to permitting, wildlife conflict response, and law enforcement; Parks said its academy can train only about 50 rangers a year, leaving many vacancies even after the proposed reductions. The Coastal Commission said the affected positions support SB 272 sea-level rise planning with local governments. DPR said the proposed cuts would affect multiple branches involved in pesticide registration, enforcement, and safety review, while DTSC said it was still hiring from a large 2022 reform package and had reduced its vacancy rate from about 30 percent to 15 percent before the drill. The State Water Board said its proposed reductions would be spread across programs and could lead to slower permitting and backlogs, though it would protect drinking water functions as much as possible. The committee then moved to a State Water Resources Control Board overview and a new budget proposal tied to the U.S. Supreme Court’s Sackett decision. Chair Esquivel described the board’s responsibilities for water quality, water rights, drinking water, and financial assistance, and said the board is updating the Bay-Delta Plan while also pursuing voluntary agreements and broader water-rights administration. He said federal workforce reductions and the Sackett ruling have increased pressure on state programs. The board requested $2.6 million and 12 permanent positions from the Waste Discharge Permit Fund to address permitting and enforcement gaps created by the narrowing of federal Clean Water Act jurisdiction. The LAO said the request met its high bar for new proposals because it was supported by the board’s data and would help maintain water-quality protections, though it noted that state processes are less efficient than the federal framework they are now partially replacing.

Transcript Highlights:

• But we had a budget update this morning, and it started, and being a budget sub-chair, it's important
• to be there for the budget updates.
• So planning will begin in the budget year, with project awards in budget year plus one.
• The governor's budget includes trailer bill language to ensure the effective implementation of the climate
• Governor's budget includes trailer bill language to ensure the effective implementation of the climate

Summary: The Assembly Budget Subcommittee heard the administration’s spending plan for Proposition 4’s climate smart agriculture and biodiversity chapters, along with related trailer bill language. CDFA outlined proposed funding for existing programs such as SWEEP, Healthy Soils, Urban Agriculture, and invasive species work, plus new or phased-in programs including year-round and mobile farmers’ markets, tribal food sovereignty, and regional farm equipment sharing. The Department of Conservation described funding for the California Farmland Conservancy Program and Working Lands and Riparian Corridors Program, while the Department of Finance and LAO discussed pending allocations and generally found the overall approach reasonable, though LAO suggested the Legislature may want more statutory guidance and reporting, especially for new programs. Members focused on implementation details, equity, and accountability. Questions covered how programs would serve vulnerable and disadvantaged communities, whether new solicitations would be reopened for previously oversubscribed grants, how outcomes are tracked, and how to structure guidance for new programs such as farm equipment sharing. The chair emphasized that the Legislature wants clearer direction on program design and noted that AB 2313 should guide implementation of the regional farm equipment sharing allocation. The committee also discussed the administration’s request to directly appropriate bond funds to departments and to exempt bond program guidelines from the Administrative Procedures Act; LAO supported the APA exemption with possible legislative guardrails for public notice and comment. The committee then heard on the farm-to-school proposal, with CDFA requesting $24.9 million General Fund for incubator grants, technical assistance, and network support. CDFA said the program has reached nearly half of California schoolchildren and has shown strong demand and positive evaluation results. LAO supported the core program but recommended rejecting the $3 million technical assistance component as too broad and suggested the Legislature consider using Proposition 98 for some of the funding. Members debated that point, with some expressing concern about using General Fund dollars for a new discretionary request during a tight budget year. The biodiversity and nature-based solutions chapter included funding for the Wildlife Conservation Board, state conservancies, and tribal nature-based solutions. WCB described major recent investments and proposed projects tied to 30 by 30, habitat restoration, tribal partnerships, and public access. Members raised concerns about long-term stewardship, the size of the WCB allocation, and whether the Legislature should receive more detail on how funds will be distributed. The committee also heard requests for Bolsa Chica wetlands maintenance and Rincon Island decommissioning funding from the State Lands Commission, with members questioning long-term liability, remediation costs, and the role of private oil operators. No votes were taken, and the hearing ended with public comment from stakeholders largely supporting the APA exemption, farm-to-school funding, biodiversity investments, and related conservation programs.

Transcript Highlights:

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

Keywords: 988, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• DCSS has taken immediate steps to tighten its budget, identify efficiencies, and implement cost-saving
• budget to identify<00:04:11.519> efficiencies<00:04:12.319> and<00:04:12.640> implement
• regarding our budget requests. regarding our budget requests.
• That's what your budget is for, provided by the state budget and the federal 66% match.
• um any additional budget to cover that. um any additional budget to cover that.

Keywords: Meeting Start 00:00:00 Attendance Roll Call 00:00:10 Office of the Attorney General 00:00:58 Office of Homeland Security 00:17:39, 958, all

Summary: The House Budget Review Subcommittee on General Government heard presentations on several Attorney General and Homeland Security budget items. Amy Burke of the Department of Child Support Services said the program inherited a structural shortfall of more than $13 million after the transition from CHFS, including about $14 million in federal child support incentive funds that had been used to cover core operating costs and county attorney contracts. She explained that federal law requires incentive funds to supplement, not supplant, baseline services, and said the Attorney General’s budget request seeks general fund support to replace that gap and help balance the program going forward. Members asked for clarification on the misuse of the funds, the size of the shortfall, and whether the requested money would be unrestricted; staff said the intent is to use it as a contract offset for core services. Commissioner Rich Ferretti then presented the Department of Criminal Investigations’ request for additional staffing and a Western Kentucky Digital Forensics Lab. He said DCI wants one additional special victims unit investigator and one digital forensic examiner to handle increasingly digital cases involving child exploitation, sexual assault, human trafficking, and technology-facilitated abuse. He also described plans for a lab in Mayfield, co-located with the new Mayfield Police Department facility, to reduce travel time, speed forensic processing, and improve access for rural communities. Committee members responded positively and asked no substantive questions. Finally, the Office of Homeland Security outlined Kentucky’s Next Generation 911 project. Officials said the current 911 system was built for landlines, while most calls now come from mobile devices, and the upgrade will add precise location routing plus text, photo, and video capability. Shelley Clark described the funding model, including wireless subscriber fees and a dedicated tech fund, and reviewed progress on mapping, vendor selection, and migration to the new platform, with completion expected by July 2027. Members asked about local maintenance costs and the impact on rural areas; officials said maintenance is local but supported in part by collected funds, and implementation will not be delayed for rural localities. The meeting concluded with no votes or formal actions taken.

Transcript Highlights:

• budget budget um it the 2022 2024 banial budget budget um it allowed<00:13:30.399> for<00:13:
• the confines of the budget and with the the confines of the budget and with the what<00:17:37.080>
• Obviously, it was implemented in 2025, so they were out of date at implementation.
• Obviously, it was implemented in 2025, so they were out of date at implementation.
• Obviously, it was implemented in 2025, so they were out of date at implementation.

Keywords: 958, all

Summary: The Budget Review Subcommittee on Health and Family Services met with a quorum still coming together and first handled roll call and minutes. The main presentation came from the Department for Medicaid Services, with Commissioner Lisa Lee and CFO Steve Beckle giving an overview of Kentucky Medicaid, its federal-state financing structure, and the department’s 1915(c) home- and community-based waiver programs. They explained FMAP funding levels for traditional Medicaid, administration, IT, expansion adults, and CHIP, and noted the size of the program, including more than 600,000 Kentucky children eligible for Medicaid or CHIP, about 485,000 expansion adults, over 69,000 enrolled providers, and $18.5 billion in 2024 expenditures. A major focus was the waiver system, including the acquired brain injury waivers, model waiver, independence waiver, Michelle P. waiver, and Supports for Community Living waiver. The department said these waivers are intended to keep people with physical or developmental disabilities in home and community settings rather than facilities, and that many services are not covered by Medicare or commercial insurance. Officials described participant-directed services, interagency administration, and eligibility rules, including that some waiver programs use the child’s income only rather than family income. They also reported an unduplicated waiver wait list of 13,930 people and said the General Assembly had added waiver slots in the last budget, including 650 ABI slots and 1,275 more to be allocated July 1, 2025. The department also discussed a waiver rate study conducted by Guidehouse, explaining that CMS requires a defensible rate methodology because there is no Medicare or commercial benchmark for many waiver services. They said the study used cost and wage surveys, provider and stakeholder input, and aimed to improve transparency, provider stability, and rate parity. Officials reviewed prior COVID-era Appendix K rate increases and budget-driven increases, and said the budget ultimately funded rates at about 70% of the benchmark study, while preserving higher existing rates where needed so no provider would be cut. They highlighted larger differences in behavioral support and case management rates, and said a public report is available. Members asked several questions about the potential impact of federal FMAP changes, especially possible reductions in the enhanced match for expansion adults and Medicaid IT/admin activities. DMS said any FMAP reduction would require more state general fund dollars, estimating about $75 million for each 1% drop in the expansion match, while impacts on administrative IT funding would depend on the systems being built or implemented in a given year. Members also pressed for clarification on waiver wait-list procedures, funded versus filled slots, and what happens when someone on the wait list is later found ineligible. DMS said people on the wait list may not yet have been assessed, can be reevaluated if conditions change, and are still eligible for regular Medicaid state-plan services if they qualify, even if they are waiting for waiver services.

Transcript Highlights:

• Of the Assembly Budget Committee, today's informational hearing is going to go over our budget bill and
• In human services, the budget includes funding to continue implementing the foster care tiered rate structure
• in this final budget.
• It appears that there is less funding in the budget now dedicated to implementing the voters' will regarding
• implement.

Keywords: 988, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• It's a proposal from the Governor's budget to have professional development to support the implementation
• So, to your point, this is full implementation.
• So it's covering more costs of implementation.
• Let me just interrupt: covering all the costs of implementation. Okay.
• We appreciate the literacy investments and the Governor's budget proposal.

Summary: The committee heard a series of budget proposals focused on education finance, with repeated questions about whether the state’s investments are coordinated, targeted to the highest-need students, and likely to produce measurable results. On the first item, the administration proposed $1 million for a study of California’s curriculum framework, standards, and instructional materials process, plus $250,000 for supplemental ELA/ELD guidance. CDE and Finance said the study would examine how other states organize standards, frameworks, and adoptions, while the chair and members questioned why California has gone so long without updating some standards, what the study would actually accomplish, and whether the proposal was too vague to justify the cost. The issue was held open. The committee then took up a proposed $25 million statewide literacy network within the system of support. CCEE and CDE said the network would coordinate multiple existing literacy leads, create a clearinghouse of evidence-based resources, and improve coherence across the state’s many literacy initiatives. Members pressed on how a one-time, five-year allocation could support a long-term system, how the work would reach distressed and rural districts, and whether the proposal would translate into classroom change rather than just another layer of coordination. The issue was also held open. Next, the committee reviewed a $500 million proposal to expand literacy coaches and reading specialists and to create a math coaches program. CDE described the existing literacy coach cohorts as producing positive reports from participating LEAs, while the LAO recommended modifications, especially for the math coach portion, including limiting eligibility to elementary schools, setting minimum grant amounts, directing funds to eligible school sites, and making eligibility automatic rather than application-based. Members focused on whether coaches were actually being placed at the schools with the greatest need and whether the state has a coherent long-term strategy for literacy and math investments. The committee also heard a $40 million proposal for training and implementation of K-2 reading difficulty screeners, which the LAO said was reasonable but could be reduced because $25 million had already been provided for training; CDE said the new funds were needed for full implementation, procurement, and sustainability. Finally, the committee heard a $10 million proposal for a developmentally appropriate TK multilingual learner screener, with CDE explaining why the preschool language-identification process is different from K-12 EL assessment and the chair asking staff to explore whether a single, more consistent approach could be developed. The meeting concluded with a presentation on universal school meals and kitchen infrastructure, including a $31.5 million backfill, an $84.1 million increase for projected meal growth, a COLA adjustment, and $150 million for kitchen upgrades and training to support freshly prepared meals.

Transcript Highlights:

• So the budget itself is a budget proposal that we do have for this.
• in the budget year.
• This budget solution.
• for budget year, there's no change from the Governor's Budget.
• , and for budget year 2026–27... ...1% from the Governor's Budget, and for budget year 2026–27, down

Keywords: 987, senate, all

Summary: The subcommittee first heard May Revision items for child support, child care, and related human services. The Department of Child Support Services described two technical adjustments, which the LAO said raised no concerns. The Department of Social Services then walked through child care proposals, including a shift in how federal and Proposition 64 funding reductions would be absorbed, a 2.01% COLA, disaster-related child care infrastructure grants, an increase in in-contract administrative support costs for alternative payment agencies, reversion of prospective-pay implementation funding after a federal rule change, a one-time allocation to cover the first quarter of Cost of Care Plus payments in the next fiscal year, reappropriation for existing infrastructure grant closeout work, and estimates of unspent child care funds. The department also outlined trailer bill language on a single rate structure, site safety and emergency procedures, CalWORKs child care data sharing, and child care oversight. The LAO recommended that the Legislature seek more justification for shifting reductions from General Child Care to the Alternative Payment Program, noting that CAP reductions affect more slots and that General Child Care has had significant unspent funds. It supported removing prospective-pay funding, but recommended rejecting the administrative cost shift to a percentage-based rate because it could create future General Fund pressure. It also suggested the Legislature review alignment between the disaster grants and the child care infrastructure program. Senators and members pressed the administration on why the budget would reduce child care slots and COLA percentages while the state still has waitlists and unspent funds, and questioned the need for early funding of Cost of Care Plus payments and the move from a flat administrative amount to a percentage. Public commenters, including providers, advocates, county offices, and infrastructure partners, urged full COLA funding, preservation of child care slots, support for prospective pay, and continued investment in child care access and facilities. After a short recess, the committee moved to Part B on health and heard the Department of State Hospitals. DSH presented a May Revision budget of $3.2 billion and described proposals for a central utility plant replacement at Metropolitan State Hospital, an electronic health record implementation, reduced county bed billing authority due to phased-in LPS bed capacity, limited contract exemption authority for online clinical subscriptions, reversion of prior-year unspent operating funds, and a workforce development proposal shifting some costs to Behavioral Health Services Act funds, including support for an additional psychiatric training cohort at Napa. The department also outlined IST-related savings and a trailer bill to remove the sunset on the independent placement panel program.