Video & Transcript : 'aggregate bond limitation' :
Page 418 of 500
CA
California 2025-2026 Regular Session
Senate Budget and Fiscal Review Committee Jun 24th, 2026
Transcript Highlights:
- They are excluded from the Gann limit, or the state appropriations limit.
- The state appropriations limit. The state appropriations limit.”
- limit.
- limit.
- limit.
Summary:
The Senate Committee on Budget and Fiscal Review held an informational hearing on ACA 20, the Save for California’s Future Act, and took no votes. The chair described the measure as a way to strengthen the state’s Rainy Day Fund by increasing reserves during strong revenue years and helping pay down long-term obligations. The vice chair said he preferred a broader spending rule tied to a rolling average of revenues, rather than the proposal’s reserve-focused approach.
The Legislative Analyst’s Office explained how Proposition 2 currently requires deposits into the Budget Stabilization Account and debt payments when revenues are strong, and how ACA 20 would change those rules by increasing required reserve deposits, raising the BSA target from 10% to 20% of General Fund revenues, creating a “super excess capital gains” deposit requirement, extending debt-payment requirements through 2040, and expanding eligible debt uses to include Proposition 98 settle-up, budgetary borrowing, and federal unemployment insurance debt. The Department of Finance said the administration supports the measure and believes it improves Proposition 2. Members asked about the Gann limit, whether the measure would allow more spending or simply change how deposits are counted, the impact on infrastructure and other programs, the size of the UI debt, and how the proposal would affect future budget flexibility.
Several senators supported the goal of saving more in good years and using reserves to avoid painful cuts in downturns, while others questioned whether the proposal was sufficiently simple or whether a larger structural spending rule would be better. Public comment largely supported the measure, with one former legislative staffer arguing it follows earlier reserve reforms and helps address the state’s UI debt. The chair closed by noting the committee would not act that day and that the measure would be considered on the Senate floor the next day.
ID
Transcript Highlights:
- I think there's something called virtual limits, which means that there is no posted limit, but there's
- I think there's something called virtual limits, which means that there is no posted limit, but there's
- we don't have variable speed limits?
- of what that posted speed limit is.
- Especially a minimum speed limit.
Committee:
House Transportation and Defense
ID
Transcript Highlights:
- Term Limits.
- Term Limits.
- In Idaho, we don't have term limits. In Idaho, we don't have term limits.
- And I'm for term limits.
- It doesn't limit it to legal assistance. It doesn't limit it to anything else.
Committee:
House Judiciary, Rules and Administration
CA
California 2025-2026 Regular Session
Senate Budget and Fiscal Review Committee Jun 24th, 2026
Budget and Fiscal Review
Transcript Highlights:
- They are excluded from the Gann limit, or the state appropriations limit.
- appropriations limit.
- The state appropriations limit inherently allows for spending above the limit, if that makes sense.
- The original Gann limit was Proposition 4, I think, in 1979, and it did establish the limit at population
- did really was a limitation on the ability to spend money—they made the Gann limit virtually meaningless
Committee:
Senate Budget and Fiscal Review
ID
Idaho 2026 Regular Session
Agenda Mar 3rd, 2026
Transcript Highlights:
- Term Limits.
- Term Limits.
- be their term limits.
- In Idaho, we don't have term limits. In Idaho, we don't have term limits.
- And I'm for term limits.
Summary:
The committee first approved the minutes and then heard extensive testimony on HCR 23, a resolution calling for an Article V convention to propose congressional term limits. The bill’s sponsor and supporters argued that Congress is broken, term limits are broadly popular, and the states should use Article V pressure to force Congress to act. Supporters said the convention process is controlled by the states and ratification by 38 states is a strong safeguard. Opponents, including several Republican officials and private citizens, warned that an Article V convention is unpredictable, could exceed its intended scope, and could threaten the Constitution; they urged using elections instead. After debate, the committee adopted a motion to hold HCR 23 in committee by an 8-7 roll call vote.
The committee then took up House Bill 764, which would prohibit organizations from knowingly transporting, harboring, or providing certain assistance to people unlawfully present in the United States, with language modeled on federal immigration law. The sponsor said the bill does not target immigrants themselves or ordinary charitable aid, but rather organizations that facilitate illegal immigration and related fraud, and argued the state can mirror existing federal prohibitions to support enforcement. Questions focused on how the bill would affect nonprofits, the meaning of “harboring,” and whether the bill improperly incorporates federal definitions. Testimony from the Idaho Food Bank and others opposed the bill, warning it could criminalize routine charitable work, create fear among volunteers, and be difficult to administer because of vague standards like “reckless disregard.” A Catholic witness said the bill would burden religious obligations to aid migrants regardless of status, while supporters maintained the bill would not interfere with lawful charity and would only reach knowing facilitation of illegal conduct.
ID
Idaho 2026 Regular Session
Agenda Feb 26th, 2026
Transcript Highlights:
- I think there's something called virtual limits, which means that there is no posted limit, but there's
- we don't have variable speed limits?
- But this bill doesn't affect speed limits at all. This bill has nothing to do with speed limits.
- of what that posted speed limit is.
- Especially a minimum speed limit.
Summary:
The committee first approved minutes from February 16, 18, and 24, 2026. It then heard House Bill 664, which would remove differential speed limits for commercial vehicles and make truck speed limits consistent with posted limits for other vehicles. Representative Pickett argued the bill was about reducing speed variability and related crash risk, not setting a new speed limit. Trucking industry witnesses testified that heavier trucks need longer stopping distances, many fleets govern their trucks below posted limits, and the bill would not materially change truck speeds but could increase safety risks if some trucks went faster. Other members raised concerns about triples, urban-area language, and whether the bill could effectively open the door to higher truck speeds. After debate, the committee voted 10-6 to send HB 664 to the floor with a do-pass recommendation.
The committee next considered House Bill 667, which would remove the statutory requirement that Idaho DMV offer non-domiciled CDLs and instead give the department discretion. Representative Handy said the bill was a response to recent crashes involving out-of-state CDL holders and would let Idaho step back while federal rules settle. With no opposing testimony, the committee quickly passed the bill to the floor with a do-pass recommendation.
House Bill 717 followed, proposing a $75 fee for new residents who fail to register vehicles within 30 days and for vehicles not renewed after expiration, with an exemption for vehicles not in use. Representative Mickelsen said the bill would ensure new residents help pay for roads and infrastructure. The Idaho Association of Counties and Highway Districts asked for amendments so the fee would go to the highway distribution fund rather than the state highway fund and to clarify the exemption language to include local roads. The sponsor agreed to the amendment request, and the committee sent HB 717 to general orders. Finally, House Bill 716 was heard, which updates highway distribution account language and increases the local bridge inspection fund from $175,000 to $300,000 to match current costs and secure federal matching funds. After brief questions, the committee passed HB 716 to the floor with a do-pass recommendation.
FL
Transcript Highlights:
- There are now four that have 12-year term limits. There are now four that have 12-year term limits.
- I'm not here today in opposition to term limits.
- This is not about rejecting term limits.
- I think, I believe in term limits. I think that they serve I think I believe in term limits.
- question... ...12-year term limits.
Committee:
Senate Ethics and Elections
Summary:
The Committee on Ethics and Elections met with a quorum present and temporarily postponed Senator Yarborough’s bill and Senate Bill 1170 at the sponsor’s request. The committee first considered Senate Bill 982 by Senator Bernard, which was amended to remove language the sponsor said had been declared unconstitutional in 2016. As amended, the bill addresses qualifying fee payment issues, allows qualifying fees to be paid by properly executed checks or debit cards linked to a candidate campaign account, creates a private right of action for qualifying challenges limited to candidates, and addresses campaign expenditures by debit card. Mark Heron testified in support, saying the bill would clarify recent qualifying disputes. The committee adopted the amendment and then reported SB 982 favorably.
The committee then took up Senate Joint Resolution 536, a proposed constitutional amendment to impose legislative term limits of eight years in the House and eight years in the Senate, with carve-outs for current officeholders and redistricting. An amendment to change the limits to 12 years in each chamber failed on a tie vote. Public testimony was mixed but largely opposed, with speakers from county and small-county groups arguing the proposal was a one-size-fits-all statewide mandate that would override local choice and reduce institutional knowledge. Several members debated whether the eight-year limit was the right number, with some supporting term limits in principle but questioning a lifetime ban on returning to office. The resolution was ultimately reported favorably.
The committee also considered Senate Joint Resolution 802, which would place on the 2026 ballot an eight-year term limit for county commissioners and school board members, with school board limits applied retroactively and county commissioner limits prospectively. An amendment to change the limit to 12 years failed. The Florida Association of Counties, a county commissioner, and representatives of the Small County Coalition testified against the measure, arguing that counties should retain local control through county charters and local referenda. Some senators supported the concept of term limits but raised concerns about imposing a uniform statewide rule on counties and school boards. After debate, the joint resolution was reported favorably. At the end of the meeting, senators who had missed votes were allowed to register their positions on SB 982 and SJR 536, and the committee moved to rise.
AL
Alabama 2025 Regular Session
Alabama House Ports, Waterways & Intermodal Transit Committee Feb 12th, 2025
Ports, Waterways & Intermodal Transit
Transcript Highlights:
- There would be no minimum, maximum size, or slot limits... ...no minimum, maximum size, or slot limits
- So we are not curtailing their ability to limit or create a slot limit; they still can do that.
- either... ...limit placed.
- There because the slot limit was only in... ...there because the slot limit was only in place for fishing
- There are ways we can do this without a slot limit. We can do this without a slot limit.
Committee:
House Ports, Waterways & Intermodal Transit
Keywords:
DUI, driving under the influence, ignition interlock, interlock device, driver license suspension, restricted license, motor vehicle, alcohol offense, first offense, repeat offender, blood alcohol concentration, BAC, license revocation, Alabama State Law Enforcement Agency, ALEA, public safety, traffic safety, chemical dependency, substance abuse, court referral program
FL
Florida 2025 Regular Session
Ethics and Elections Mar 17th, 2025
Transcript Highlights:
- CURRENTLY, THERE ARE 12 COUNTIES THAT HAVE TERM LIMITS.
- THERE ARE NOW FOUR THAT HAVE 12 YEAR TERM LIMITS. THE OTHER EIGHT HAVE EIGHT-YEAR TERM LIMITS.
- I BELIEVE IN TERM LIMITS. I THINK THAT THEY SERVE A PURPOSE.
- POPULAR OF ANY TERM LIMITS.
- AND THEN ON TOP OF THAT IS CONGRESS DOESN'T HAVE TERM LIMITS.
VT
Transcript Highlights:
- </c> of limitations. of limitations.
- Um, essentially when we look at categories of limitation—limits on prosecution—the statute of limitations
- </c><00:48:13.520><c> limits</c><00:48:14.000><c> on</c> categories of limitation limits on categories
- the statute of limit uh limitations limitations limitations um<00:48:19.920><c> we</c><00:48:20.240>
- </c> statute of limitations has run out. statute of limitations has run out.
MO
Missouri 2026 Regular Session
Commerce Feb 16th, 2026
Commerce, Consumer Protection, Energy and the Environment
Transcript Highlights:
- The statute of limitations is age 21 plus 10, so making it 31.
- Why do we have a statute of limitations in the first place?
- it was filed outside the limitations period.
- , I don't know, shorter limitations period frees up capital.
- We were able to pass a limited liability, and that's what you sign.
Summary:
The committee first heard House Bill 1645, which would reduce Missouri’s general personal injury statute of limitations from five years to two years for claims after August 28, 2026, while also extending the civil statute of limitations for child sexual abuse claims from 10 years to 20 years after the victim turns 21. Representative Overcast and supporters from the insurance and business communities argued the change would improve Missouri’s business climate, lower insurance costs, and align the state with most others; opponents, including trial lawyers and victim advocates, warned that shortening the filing window would harm injured adults and sexual abuse survivors who need more time to come forward. Representative Sites supported the child sexual abuse expansion but said broader retroactivity work was still ongoing. No vote was taken in the hearing itself, but the bill drew both support and opposition testimony.
The committee then heard House Bill 1610 and House Bill 2182, both of which were described as similar proposals to shorten the general civil statute of limitations, with HB 1610 moving from five years to three years and HB 2182 moving from five years to two years. Supporters repeated the same business-climate and insurance-rate arguments, while opponents repeated concerns about access to justice and the time needed to investigate complex injuries. Several witnesses from the insurance, chamber, farm bureau, railroad, and business groups testified in support, and some said they preferred two years over three. The chair noted the testimony was largely repetitive across the bills, and the hearings concluded without recorded votes in the transcript.
Finally, the committee heard House Bill 2714, which would change Missouri from a pure comparative fault system to a modified comparative fault system, barring recovery if a plaintiff is found more than 50% at fault. The sponsor and supporters said the bill would make Missouri more business-friendly and more consistent with neighboring states, while opponents from the trial bar argued it would unfairly cut off recovery for injured people and that juries already apportion fault under current law. Testimony focused on how fault percentages are determined, the effect on settlements and trials, and examples such as car crashes and product liability cases. The hearing ended with continued opposition testimony and no final committee action reported in the transcript.
MO
Transcript Highlights:
- Why do we have a statute of limitations in the first place?
- it was filed outside the limitations period.
- “How does this statute of limitations generally affect insurance rates?
- I have a case in Kentucky where it's a one-year statute of limitations.
- Than somebody who's going a little bit over the speed limit.
Committee:
House Commerce
CA
California 2025-2026 Regular Session
Assembly Budget Subcommittee No. 7 on Accountability and Oversight May 7th, 2025
Transcript Highlights:
- That's called the state appropriations limit at the state level.
- or the Gann limit.
- or the GAN limit.
- And so the Gann limit has been the focus of these discussions.
- And a key thing with the Gann limit, as it was amended in 1990, is that the Gann limit is designed to
Summary:
The Assembly Budget Subcommittee on Accountability and Oversight held a hearing on proposals to reform California’s Budget Stabilization Account, or rainy day fund, ahead of the May Revision. Members and witnesses reviewed how Proposition 2 (2014) changed reserve rules, including mandatory deposits, a 10% cap on the fund, and limits tied to the Governor’s declaration of a budget emergency. LAO staff explained that California’s revenues are highly volatile, that current reserve rules are complicated by interactions with Proposition 98 and the Gann limit, and that under current law reserves would cover only about one-third of funding shortfalls in a benchmark scenario over 50 years.
The LAO presented its report recommending a larger reserve target, including raising the cap to 50% by 2055 and pairing that with either broader, more flexible deposit rules or a simpler approach that deposits all excess capital gains. The Department of Finance described the Governor’s proposal to raise the cap from 10% to 20% and exempt BSA deposits from the state appropriations limit, while Assembly Member Valencia presented ACA 1, which would make similar changes and was described as an evolving proposal. Testimony generally supported saving more during boom years, but differed on how much to hardwire into the Constitution versus leave flexible, and on whether to broaden the deposit formulas beyond capital gains.
Public witnesses and committee members raised additional issues, including whether reserve reforms should also address debt repayment, the treatment of unemployment insurance fund debt, and whether the Gann limit should be adjusted to better allow reserve growth. Supporters argued that stronger reserves would protect Californians from cuts during downturns and help the state weather volatility and federal funding threats. Some advocates warned that reforms should not come at the expense of current public needs, while taxpayer representatives cautioned against turning the BSA into a pass-through account that weakens constitutional spending limits. The hearing ended without a vote, with the committee chair noting the complexity of the issue and adjourning after public comment.
ND
North Dakota 2026 1st Special Session
Legislative Procedure and Arrangements Apr 22nd, 2026
Legislative Procedure and Arrangements Committee
Transcript Highlights:
- limits, or whether states that don't have term limits experience a higher rate of turnover nationally
- I mean, I have a limit of four bill drafts.
- result in the need for interim limits?
- Do they support term limits on each elected office?
- But some people—I just like a reset in their term limits. Mr.
Summary:
The Legislative Arrangements and Procedure Committee met with a quorum, approved the prior minutes, and then took up several follow-up items related to legislative security, public records, and the impacts of term limits. The Secretary of State’s office presented draft language to make legislators’ and candidates’ residential addresses confidential in public records, with discussion of who would be covered, how the protection would work, and whether it should expire when a candidate’s term ends. Members raised concerns about unintended consequences, transparency, and whether the public should still be able to see enough information to evaluate residency requirements. Rather than act immediately, the committee set the draft aside for a future meeting and asked for an amendment reflecting the Secretary of State’s suggested changes.
The committee also reviewed a security best-practices memo and NCSL materials on capitol security. The memo encouraged legislators to be aware of their surroundings, avoid real-time vacation posting, vary routines, report threats, and follow security alerts. Members discussed a recent incident and the need to improve alert distribution and update contact information so legislators and staff receive notices consistently. The Secretary of State and committee members noted that the alert system may need refinement, including a separate legislative notification channel.
The bulk of the meeting was devoted to Garrity Consulting’s final report on how to mitigate the effects of legislative term limits. The consultants summarized interviews, surveys, and focus groups with legislators, the public, and stakeholders, identifying major themes such as loss of institutional knowledge, leadership turnover, staffing pressures, and the need for stronger onboarding and training. Recommendations included considering annual sessions or shifting biennial sessions to even-numbered years, restructuring organizational session, making interim committees more consistent with regular committees, adding office hours, formalizing mentorship and leadership succession planning, expanding staff and professional development resources, creating public-facing educational tools, and improving communication and virtual testimony options. Members generally appreciated the report and its phased implementation roadmap, while also debating the practicality of some recommendations and the tension between making service more demanding and keeping the legislature accessible to new candidates.
WY
Wyoming 2026 Regular Session
Joint Conference Committee - HB0045, March 4, 2026
Transcript Highlights:
- </c> that was added was the limit. that was added was the limit.
- </c><00:08:29.039><c> on</c> inserting establishing a limitation on inserting establishing a limitation
- too because what it kind of it a limit too because what it kind of it limits<00:08:53.760><c> your</
- :28.720><c> the</c> we are establishing a limitation on the we are establishing a limitation on the long-term
- 09:43.040><c> language</c> believe that that limitation language believe that that limitation language
Summary:
The joint conference committee on House Bill 45 met to reconcile changes to the long-term homeowner property tax exemption. Members reviewed the original bill, which removed the exemption’s sunset, adjusted the signup/reporting date and procedures, clarified treatment for homeowners who sold one house and bought another, changed valuation language from assessed value to fair market value, and added a $3 million cap. The committee also discussed Senate amendments and a proposed cleanup amendment intended to prevent stacking the long-term homeowner exemption with a separate voter-approved homeowners’ property tax initiative if that initiative becomes law.
Members asked about the difference between using “shall not qualify” versus a repealer, and were told the repealer was removed to avoid creating a trigger-bill issue if the initiative does not pass. Questions also focused on whether the catch title’s “limitation” language referred to the $3 million cap, and it was explained that the language could apply both to the cap and to the restriction on using both exemptions. One senator asked what Senate language was being deleted, and the response was that the committee was removing language that had gone too far, including a 25% exemption provision that was outside the scope of this bill and would be handled later in the interim.
After discussion, the committee moved to concurrence. A roll call vote was taken, and all six members present voted aye. The committee announced concurrence and adjourned.
ND
North Dakota 2025-2026 Regular Session
Legislative Procedure and Arrangements Apr 22nd, 2026
Transcript Highlights:
- I mean, I have a limit of four bill drafts.
- Will the impact of term limits result in the need for interim limits? Was asked to address.
- A number of the states have had term limits for over 20 years.
- Do they support term limits on each elected office?
- But some people, I just like a reset in their term limits. Mr.
Summary:
The Legislative Procedure and Arrangements Committee met with a quorum, approved the prior minutes, and then took up a draft bill to make legislators’ and candidates’ residential addresses confidential in public records. Legislative Council and the Secretary of State explained the proposal was prompted by security concerns and would protect residential addresses while still allowing election officials to verify residency and keep candidate names and offices public. Members raised concerns about unintended consequences, transparency, and how the change would affect rural districts and residency enforcement. The Secretary of State suggested an amendment to end the confidentiality when a candidate’s term ends, and the committee agreed to hold the bill over for further discussion at the next meeting.
The committee also reviewed follow-up materials on legislator security and best practices, including advice on situational awareness, internet hygiene, varying routines, and reporting threats, along with NCSL materials comparing capitol security practices in other states. Members discussed a recent security incident and the need to keep alert contact information current, and staff said they would continue working with the Highway Patrol on legislative-specific notifications.
The bulk of the meeting was devoted to Garrity Consulting’s final report on mitigating the effects of legislative term limits. The consultants summarized survey, focus group, and stakeholder input showing concerns about loss of institutional knowledge, leadership turnover, onboarding demands, and workload pressures, while also noting public support for term limits and annual sessions. Recommendations included considering annual sessions or shifting biennial sessions to even-numbered years, restructuring organizational session and interim committee work, creating office hours and more structured orientation and mentorship, expanding ongoing training and staff support, improving public communication and virtual testimony rules, and addressing barriers to service such as employer support and travel costs. Members discussed the tension between making the legislature more effective and preserving a citizen-legislature model, and the report was received as a roadmap for future implementation rather than immediate action.
ND
North Dakota 2026 1st Special Session
Legislative Procedure and Arrangements Apr 22nd, 2026 at 01:00 pm
Legislative Procedure and Arrangements Committee
Transcript Highlights:
- states that don't have term limits experience...
- limits are experiencing a higher rate of turnover nationally.
- Will the impact of term limits result in the need for interim limits?
- Do they support term limits on each elected office?
- The term limits world, but we are moving that way.
MA
Massachusetts 2025-2026 Regular Session
Joint Committee on Election Laws Jun 21st, 2026 at 01:00 pm
Joint Committee on Election Laws
Transcript Highlights:
- We would ask those to limit testimony to three minutes.
- Risk-limiting audits can provide high assurance.
- And risk-limiting audits are flexible.
- Tabulation is just to confirm the numbers, and a risk-limiting audit... ...risk-limiting audit.
- And then, with a risk-limiting audit, as Mark was saying, it can escalate.
Committee:
Joint Joint Committee on Election Laws
Summary:
The Committee on Election Laws held a hearing on election security bills, focusing first on S. 517 and H. 876, which would strengthen Massachusetts’ post-election audit process. Testimony from the Brennan Center, Common Cause Massachusetts, Verified Voting, and the League of Women Voters supported expanding audits to include all ballot types, increasing audit frequency from every four years to every two years, requiring statewide audit reports to be posted within 30 days and kept online for six years, and allowing municipalities to conduct audits under state standards. Witnesses also praised the bill’s creation of a work group to study risk-limiting audits and other improvements, emphasizing public confidence, transparency, and the ability of audits to detect errors or deter fraud.
Committee members asked detailed questions about how Massachusetts compares with other states, how risk-limiting audits differ from current tabulation audits, how audits are selected and expanded if discrepancies appear, and what the costs and mechanics of different audit methods would be. Witnesses explained that current audits are typically random, hand-count-based checks of selected contests and batches of ballots, that risk-limiting audits use statistical sampling and can escalate to a full recount if needed, and that Massachusetts’ local-control structure makes a collaborative work group useful. They also noted that audits generally confirm results but can uncover errors that do not change outcomes, and occasionally more serious problems.
The committee then heard testimony on H. 832, which would authorize the Secretary of the Commonwealth to take emergency actions affecting elections during declared emergencies. Supporters said the bill would create a clear statutory process for rescheduling or adjusting elections during severe weather or other crises, including allowing emergency absentee ballot accommodations for civilian responders, and would reduce the need for court intervention. No votes were taken on the bills during the hearing, and the meeting ended with adjournment after no additional testimony was offered.
CA
California 2025-2026 Regular Session
Assembly Budget Subcommittee No. 7 on Accountability and Oversight Jun 24th, 2026
Transcript Highlights:
- I think you're referring to the change in the treatment of the state appropriations limit.
- For me, what I'd like to know is: what is the current constitutional Gann limit for 2026-2027?
- What the actual limit is? Mm-hmm. I think it's around $200 billion. $200 billion.
- The appropriations limit is a little bit of an apples-and-oranges calculation, if I may.
- The Gann limit would apply in the year of the withdrawal. And Mr.
CA
California 2025-2026 Regular Session
Assembly Budget Subcommittee No. 7 on Accountability and Oversight Jun 24th, 2026
Transcript Highlights:
- I think you're referring to the change in the treatment of the state appropriations limit.
- For me, what I'd like to know is: what is the current constitutional Gann limit for 2026-2027?
- What the actual limit is? Mm-hmm. I think it's around $200 billion. $200 billion.
- The appropriations limit is a little bit of an apples-and-oranges calculation, if I may.
- The Gann limit would apply in the year of the withdrawal. And Mr.
Summary:
The Assembly Budget Subcommittee on Accountability and Oversight heard ACA 20, the Safe for California Futures Act, a constitutional amendment to strengthen the state’s Budget Stabilization Account (rainy day fund). The authors, Assembly Members Gabriel and Valencia, said the measure would raise the reserve cap from 10% to 20% of General Fund revenues, change how reserve deposits are treated under the Gann limit so deposits would not count against the spending cap until withdrawn, and update eligible debt repayments to include items such as budget loans, Proposition 98 settle-up obligations, and unemployment insurance debt. They emphasized that the proposal was intended to protect schools and core public services and to help California better withstand revenue volatility and future downturns.
Committee discussion focused heavily on the technical effects of the measure, especially its interaction with Proposition 98 and the Gann limit. LAO and Department of Finance staff explained that Prop. 98 funding would not be changed directly, that the reserve deposits would be treated as exclusions from the appropriations limit, and that withdrawals would count when spent. Members asked about current reserve levels, mandatory deposits, and whether the measure would create more room for discretionary spending; supporters argued it would simply allow the state to save more in good years, while one member expressed concern that it could function as a slush fund and expand spending opportunities. Several members cited recent budget volatility, record revenues, and the need for stronger reserves, while others stressed that the measure should be understood as a future-oriented savings reform rather than a response to this year’s budget choices.
Public testimony was uniformly supportive. California Forward, Elevate California, and the California Chamber of Commerce all backed the proposal, with the Chamber noting support for the policy and highlighting the importance of addressing unemployment insurance debt for small businesses. The chair concluded by thanking the authors, staff, and witnesses, and said ACA 20 was expected to move to the Assembly floor the next day.