Transcript Highlights:

• Spokane have used a similar approach, what I'd call a variable scope, fixed budget, or bill-to-budget
• More money gets allocated to individual projects.
• And under this program, you would maybe allocate...
• And then that optimized allocation gets allocated to programs and projects, and then the project implementation
• or after project selection allocation.

Summary: The meeting began with introductions from members of the Joint Transportation Committee and a presentation from the Association of Washington Cities and the public works directors of Richland, Kennewick, Pasco, and West Richland. The cities described the Quad Cities region as one of the fastest-growing in the state and outlined shared transportation priorities that align with the committee’s focus on safety, multimodal access, climate resilience, and economic development. They emphasized Vision Zero efforts, complete streets, ADA accessibility, regional trail and bike/pedestrian planning, and coordinated long-range transportation and land-use planning to manage growth. The city officials also discussed major funding and delivery challenges, including rising construction costs, project phasing, pavement preservation, right-of-way acquisition, and delays caused by state and federal permitting and review processes. They highlighted regional cooperation through the Benton-Franklin Council of Governments, Good Roads, and local funding tools such as impact fees, transportation benefit districts, REET, tax increment financing, and state and federal grants. Specific projects discussed included Richland’s SR 240/Aaron Drive complete streets project and downtown connectivity work, Kennewick’s Columbia Center Boulevard improvements and rail study, Pasco’s Court/Road 68, Sylvester Street corridor, I-182 bridge/interchange work, and a new north-south bridge study, and West Richland’s SR 224 Red Mountain corridor project, which officials said was awarded under budget and is scheduled to begin construction. Committee members asked questions about sidewalk connections to schools, state-agency right-of-way timelines, apprenticeship utilization, contractor selection, and whether complete streets requirements add burdens to pavement preservation projects. The city officials said new development is generally meeting sidewalk standards, but older infill areas remain a gap; that state right-of-way transactions can take much longer than expected; that apprenticeship requirements are common but harder for smaller contractors and local labor markets; and that low-bid contracting leaves little room to screen for performance history. They also said complete streets requirements are usually manageable on major projects but can be difficult to absorb in smaller preservation work. The committee then shifted to a JTC-funded study on transit-oriented development, presented by Urban Institute researcher Yona Freemark. The study examined TOD conditions in 33 cities in Snohomish, King, Pierce, Clark, and Spokane counties near rail and bus rapid transit stations. Freemark said Washington’s housing affordability crisis is severe, especially near transit, and found that high-cost cities have seen more development near stations but also signs of gentrification and loss of affordable housing, while lower-cost cities have had less development and worsening affordability relative to income. He identified barriers including high debt costs, land costs, infrastructure costs, zoning and parking rules, and limited subsidies for affordable housing. He recommended more neighborhood infrastructure funding near stations, stronger affordable housing investment, and better use of public land, noting that HB 1491 and related legislation are already changing some local requirements.

Transcript Highlights:

• a lot more detail about the budget a lot more detail about the budget activities<00:09:41.000>
• <00:15:28.839> um budget um budget um I'm<00:15:29.560> going<00:15:29.680> to<00
• or produce a budget accordingly.
• legislature to consider non-ma budget legislature to consider non-ma budget growth<00:20:16.480>
• Target and produce a budget accordingly Target and produce a budget accordingly with<00:21:05.480>

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• We combed over 50 agencies in crafting the budget.
• Our budget strategies here in just a few moments.
• , so there has to be flexibility in the budget.
• I am proud to vote for this budget at this time.
• , the Senate's budget.

Bills: SCR8, SCR25, SB1, SB14, SB24, SB213, SB251, SB315, SB371, SB378, SB379, SB406, SB413, SB472, SB487, SB502, SB502, SB509, SB513, SB513, SB565, SB565, SB583, SB608, SB621, SB650, SB686, SB686, SB707, SB710, SB710, SB761, SB761, SB810, SB815, SB840, SB856, SB875, SB875, SB896, SB896, SB916, SB925, SB958, SB958, SB961, SB965, SB965, SB973, SB973, SB987, SB990, SB995, SB1018, SB1019, SB1146, SB1146, SB1198, SB1252, SB1252, SB1253, SB1253, SB1330, SB1343, SB1362, SB1499, SB1499, SB1532, SB1532, SB1547, SB1547, SB1555, SB1596, SB1596, SJR36, SJR12, SJR57, SCR25, SCR22, SCR12, SCR8, SB565, SB765, SB62, SB666, SB707, SB888, SB687, SB847, SB1248, SB14, SB1006, SB504, SB925, SB995, SB857, SB305, SB296, SB284, SB815, SB1379, SB1497, SB1499, SB1498, SB241, SB304, SB621, SB1023, SB1024, SB686, SB112, SB371, SB204, SB609, SB670, SB502, SB850, SB854, SB413, SB1555, SB1362, SB1346, SB1033, SB1220, SB1073, SB810, SB987, SB1539, SB447, SB875, SB406, SB985, SB965, SB1119, SB1505, SB24, SB1194, SB1253, SB1215, SB1532, SB1302, SB856, SB650, SB583, SB673, SB213, SB681, SB1172, SB1252, SB378, SB1343, SB608, SB487, SB955, SB957, SB988, SB990, SB1019, SB1021, SB1120, SB251, SB958, SB761, SB1, SB541, SB315, SB379, SB1018, SB1737, SB266, SB1415, SB1527, SB125, SB599, SB1330, SB53, SB916, SB896, SB1352, SB973, SB785, SB710, SB472, SB1450, SB1502, SB1566, SB414, SB1062, SB1547, SB961, SB1038, SB513, SB578, SB711, SB746, SB942, SB1404, SB1448, SB1738, SB108, SB8, SB318, SB507, SB533, SB689, SB1026, SB1349, SB1355, SB1433, SB1434, SB1596, SB1403, SB1198, SB1146, SB763, SB667, SB1059, SB617, SB1567, SB503, SB1, SB1555, SR233, SR307, SR310, SR318, SR319, SCR25, SJR72, SJR73, SJR75, SJR77, SJR79, SJR80, SJR81, SJR82, SB2198, SB2201, SB2202, SB2203, SB2204, SB2205, SB2206, SB2207, SB2208, SB2209, SB2210, SB2211, SB2213, SB2214, SB2215, SB2216, SB2217, SB2218, SB2219, SB2220, SB2221, SB2222, SB2223, SB2224, SB2225, SB2226, SB2227, SB2228, SB2229, SB2231, SB2232, SB2233, SB2234, SB2235, SB2236, SB2237, SB2238, SB2239, SB2240, SB2241, SB2242, SB2243, SB2244, SB2245, SB2246, SB2247, SB2248, SB2249, SB2250, SB2251, SB2252, SB2253, SB2254, SB2255, SB2256, SB2257, SB2258, SB2259, SB2260, SB2261, SB2262, SB2263, SB2264, SB2265, SB2266, SB2267, SB2268, SB2269, SB2270, SB2271, SB2272, SB2273, SB2274, SB2275, SB2276, SB2277, SB2278, SB2279, SB2280, SB2281, SB2282, SB2283, SB2284, SB2285, SB2286, SB2287, SB2288, SB2289, SB2290, SB2291, SB2292, SB2293, SB2294, SB2295, SB2296, SB2297, SB2298, SB2299, SB2300, SB2301, SB2302, SB2303, SB2304, SB2305, SB2306, SB2307, SB2308, SB2309, SB2310, SB2311, SB2313, SB2314, SB2315, SB2316, SB2317, SB2318, SB2319, SB2320, SB2321, SB2322, SB2323, SB2324, SB2325, SB2326, SB2327, SB2328, SB2329, SB2330, SB2331, SB2333, SB2334, SB2335, SB2336, SB2337, SB2338, SB2339, SB2340, SB2341, SB2342, SB2343, SB2344, SB2346, SB2347, SB2348, SB2349, SB2350, SB2351, SB2352, SB2353, SB2354, SB2355, SB2356, SB2357, SB2358, SB2359, SB2360, SB2361, SB2362, SB2363, SB2364, SB2365, SB2366, SB2367, SB2368, SB2369, SB2370, SB2371, SB2372, SB2373, SB2374, SB2375, SB2376, SB2377, SB2378, SB2379, SB2380, SB2381, SB2382, SB2383, SB2384, SB2385, SB2386, SB2387, SB2388, SB2389, SB2390, SB2391, SB2393, SB2394, SB2395, SB2396, SB2397, SB2398, SB2399, SB2400, SB2401, SB2402, SB2403, SB2404, SB2405, SB2406, SB2410, SB2411, SB2412, SB2413, SB2414, SB2415, SB2416, SB2417, SB2418, SB2419, SB2420, SB2421, SB2422, SB2423, SB2424, SB2426, SB2427, SB2428, SB2429, SB2430, SB2431, SB2432, SB2433, SB2434, SB2435, SB2436, SB2437, SB2438, SB2439, SB2440, SB2441, SB2442, SB2443, SB2444, SB2445, SB2446, SB2447, SB2448, SB2449, SB2450, SB2451, SB2452, SB2453, SB2454, SB2455, SB2456, SB2457, SB2458, SB2459, SB2460, SJR72, SJR73, SJR75, SJR77, SJR79, SJR80, SJR81, SJR82, SB2198, SB2201, SB2202, SB2203, SB2204, SB2205, SB2206, SB2207, SB2208, SB2209, SB2210, SB2211, SB2213, SB2214, SB2215, SB2216, SB2217, SB2218, SB2219, SB2220, SB2221, SB2222, SB2223, SB2224, SB2225, SB2226, SB2227, SB2228, SB2229, SB2231, SB2232, SB2233, SB2234, SB2235, SB2236, SB2237, SB2238, SB2239, SB2240, SB2241, SB2242, SB2243, SB2244, SB2245, SB2246, SB2247, SB2248, SB2249, SB2250, SB2251, SB2252, SB2253, SB2254, SB2255, SB2256, SB2257, SB2258, SB2259, SB2260, SB2261, SB2262, SB2263, SB2264, SB2265, SB2266, SB2267, SB2268, SB2269, SB2270, SB2271, SB2272, SB2273, SB2274, SB2275, SB2276, SB2277, SB2278, SB2279, SB2280, SB2281, SB2282, SB2283, SB2284, SB2285, SB2286, SB2287, SB2288, SB2289, SB2290, SB2291, SB2292, SB2293, SB2294, SB2295, SB2296, SB2297, SB2298, SB2299, SB2300, SB2301, SB2302, SB2303, SB2304, SB2305, SB2306, SB2307, SB2308, SB2309, SB2310, SB2311, SB2313, SB2314, SB2315, SB2316, SB2317, SB2318, SB2319, SB2320, SB2321, SB2322, SB2323, SB2324, SB2325, SB2326, SB2327, SB2328, SB2329, SB2330, SB2331, SB2333, SB2334, SB2335, SB2336, SB2337, SB2338, SB2339, SB2340, SB2341, SB2342, SB2343, SB2344, SB2346, SB2347, SB2348, SB2349, SB2350, SB2351, SB2352, SB2353, SB2354, SB2355, SB2356, SB2357, SB2358, SB2359, SB2360, SB2361, SB2362, SB2363, SB2364, SB2365, SB2366, SB2367, SB2368, SB2369, SB2370, SB2371, SB2372, SB2373, SB2374, SB2375, SB2376, SB2377, SB2378, SB2379, SB2380, SB2381, SB2382, SB2383, SB2384, SB2385, SB2386, SB2387, SB2388, SB2389, SB2390, SB2391, SB2393, SB2394, SB2395, SB2396, SB2397, SB2398, SB2399, SB2400, SB2401, SB2402, SB2403, SB2404, SB2405, SB2406, SB2410, SB2411, SB2412, SB2413, SB2414, SB2415, SB2416, SB2417, SB2418, SB2419, SB2420, SB2421, SB2422, SB2423, SB2424, SB2426, SB2427, SB2428, SB2429, SB2430, SB2431, SB2432, SB2433, SB2434, SB2435, SB2436, SB2437, SB2438, SB2439, SB2440, SB2441, SB2442, SB2443, SB2444, SB2445, SB2446, SB2447, SB2448, SB2449, SB2450, SB2451, SB2452, SB2453, SB2454, SB2455, SB2456, SB2457, SB2458, SB2459, SB2460

Keywords: central bank digital currency, CBDC, Federal Reserve, digital dollar, digital currency, cashless payments, financial privacy, cybersecurity, government surveillance, financial surveillance, money laundering, terrorism financing, illicit finance, banking policy, monetary policy, payments system, commercial banks, Texas Legislature, concurrent resolution, federal reserve digital currency

Transcript Highlights:

• Good afternoon and welcome to today's Assembly Budget Subcommittee No. 6.
• The new federal fiscal year allocations have not been released, so the amount allocated to California
• The new federal fiscal year allocations have not been released.
• So the amount allocated to California for the local, but we do want to note that the amount allocated
• Our general fund asks, our allocation has been the same for 10 years.

Summary: The committee heard a broad public safety budget hearing focused on youth justice funding, probation incentive grants, and disaster response and recovery. On the youth justice item, the Office of Youth and Community Restoration described a proposed change to the JJRBG funding formula that would shift resources away from a DJJ-based measure and toward county youth population, serious offenses, and step-down placements in less restrictive programs. Members asked about data on Native American youth; OYCR said statewide data are limited, but its SYTF data show about 1% of youth in secure youth treatment facilities were Native in 2024. The Department of Finance had no objections, and the item was discussed as a way to support alternatives to long-term incarceration. The committee then reviewed the community corrections performance incentive program for county probation departments. The Department of Finance proposed stabilizing the program with a maintenance payment, updating the performance baseline, and adding a growth factor; the LAO agreed the formula needed changes but recommended using 2022-23 data instead of 2021-23, using marginal rather than average cost assumptions, rejecting the growth payment and minimum guarantee, and adding stronger oversight through the BSCC. Finance said it was open to some technical changes but opposed a new BSCC audit framework, noting Judicial Council already surveys probation departments and that evidence-based practice use has increased over time. Members and staff indicated the proposal still needed further work. A major portion of the hearing focused on the January 2025 Southern California wildfires and state disaster response. A resident of Altadena gave emotional testimony about evacuation failures, loss of home, and the need for accountability. LAO and Cal OES outlined the disaster response and recovery system, including mutual aid, alert and warning, debris removal, FEMA and state funding streams, and the long timeline for reimbursement. Cal OES said it had pre-positioned resources, temporarily took over the county’s wireless emergency alert function for about three weeks, coordinated debris removal and recovery operations, and had already allocated more than $286 million in state funds. Officials also discussed the 100% federal cost share for emergency work for 180 days and the uncertainty created by changing federal processes and the cancellation of the BRIC resilience program. The committee also heard two smaller Cal OES items: a request to reappropriate about $22 million for the law enforcement mutual aid reimbursement program, which the LAO said should be placed in statute with clearer goals and reporting, and an update on Victims of Crime Act funding, where Cal OES said federal VOCA allocations have fallen sharply and that roughly $224 million would be needed to maintain current service levels if federal funding does not improve. Public comment included a request for funding to expand datacasting and emergency alert receivers for wildfire and earthquake warning.

Transcript Highlights:

• It'll change next year, maybe for next year's allocation, but doesn't change for this year's allocation
• Beginning in the budget year, the Governor's budget revises the funding methodology in an effort to:
• This funding will be allocated to county offices in the budget year under a revised methodology compared
• So in the budget year proposal, what we are suggesting is that because the focus is... ...budget year
• Those deferrals were adopted in the 25-26 budget and continue to create out-year budget pressure for

Summary: The committee heard testimony on three education budget items: the Expanded Learning Opportunities Program (ELOP), differentiated assistance/statewide system of support, and universal school meals plus kitchen infrastructure grants. For ELOP, the Department of Finance described the Governor’s proposal to provide $4.7 billion ongoing Proposition 98 funding and $62.4 million to set a minimum Tier 2 rate of $1,800 per pupil. The LAO recommended instead fixing the Tier 2 rate at $1,579, and committee members questioned how the rate was determined, how much funding is actually spent, and whether overlapping funding from ELOP, ACEs, and 21st Century programs is being tracked. CDE said ELOP is showing positive attendance and math outcomes, but some requested data will not be available until mid-2027; members also raised concerns about double-funding, transparency, and whether middle and high school students are being equitably served. On differentiated assistance, CCEE outlined the statewide system of support and the various tiers of universal, targeted, supplemental, and intensive assistance. Finance explained the Governor’s proposal to replace the current DA structure with a more stable universal and targeted assistance model, funded at $131.9 million ongoing, with a three-year support cycle aligned to LCAP and ESSA timelines and broader State Board authority to revise eligibility criteria. The LAO objected to considering the proposal before the State Board finalizes the new performance criteria, and committee members expressed concern that moving to a three-year cycle could delay support for LEAs that newly fall into need mid-cycle. There was also discussion about whether the proposal would weaken subgroup-based equity guardrails or give the State Board too much discretion over who qualifies for support. For school meals and kitchen infrastructure, Finance proposed $1.8 billion ongoing for universal meals and an additional $100 million ongoing plus $100 million one-time for a fourth round of kitchen infrastructure and training grants. The LAO recommended rejecting the new kitchen grant round because prior rounds are still being spent and the unmet need is not yet clear. CDE said prior investments have improved meal participation, efficiency, and menu variety, but many schools still lack the facilities for scratch cooking and face construction, electrical, and procurement barriers. Members asked for more data on how prior grants were used, which schools are benefiting, and whether funds could also support lower-cost food access strategies such as pantries, while noting federal restrictions on some meal-service innovations.

Transcript Highlights:

• Today we have before us the omnibus jobs, labor, and economic development budget bill, Senate File 1832
• <00:04:43.280> some Um, as chairs, we have allocated some Um, as chairs, we have allocated
• <00:05:13.360> Um<00:05:13.759> unfortunately, allocate well to that.
• Um unfortunately, allocate well to that.
• that we will also be amending the budget that we will also be amending the budget resolution<00:

Bills: SF1832, HF2440

Keywords: economic development, small business, workforce training, grants, entrepreneurship, equity, community support, labor market, employment, funding, data analysis, 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• to allocation reducing the allocation to allocation reducing the allocation to Global<00:17:11.199
• <03:32:05.359> in<03:32:05.520> this<03:32:05.720> budget that are not allocated
• in this budget that are not allocated in this budget the<03:32:06.239> hope<03:32:06.439>
• budget.
• You'll see that in my budget there's no allocation for things like office expense or office space expense

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The committee first reviewed House Bill 1, focusing on the legislative branch budget, especially the Senate and House lines. Members discussed that the Senate’s fiscal year 2025 adjusted authorized amount was higher than 2024 actual spending, largely due to personnel, benefits, and travel, and one member proposed a $500,000 annual cut. Staff explained that any reduction would need to be allocated across specific line items such as personnel, benefits, and travel, and noted that the Senate budget is entirely General Funds. After discussion of how the adjusted authorized figures were calculated and why the branch no longer staffs some joint committees as it once did, the committee moved on without taking a vote on that section. The committee then heard a detailed presentation from the New Hampshire Retirement System. NHRS officials described their statutory administrative budget, which is funded through the retirement trust rather than the General Fund, and said the FY 2026-2027 increase is driven by IT modernization, cybersecurity, a new strategic plan, and additional staff positions. They also reviewed the system’s funding progress, clean audit opinions, investment performance, and changes to asset allocation, while noting that several recent pension-related laws required major database changes. Members questioned the large increase in salaries and benefits, the need for new employees versus contractors, the purpose of training costs, and the source of the Group Two benefit funding. NHRS said the governor’s budget includes General Funds for Group Two benefit changes, with $5 million in FY 2026 and $27.9 million in FY 2027, and that the figures reflect the governor’s recommendation and related HB 2 provisions. Committee members also asked about employer and employee contribution rates for Group Two police and fire members, which NHRS said were not included in the budget document but were about 31.2% for police and 30.35% for fire, with employee shares around 11.55% and 11.8%. The committee did not make a decision on the NHRS budget during this exchange and indicated it would review the details further before returning to it later. The committee then heard from the Community Development Finance Authority on the State Treasury Department budget line for the required state match to administer the federal Community Development Block Grant program. CDFA explained that its $280,000 annual request for FY 2026 and FY 2027, totaling $560,000, supports administration, technical assistance, contracting, and monitoring of roughly $19 million in annual federal CDBG funds. Members asked about the leverage of the state match, oversight of projects, staffing, and grant prioritization. CDFA said it has 18 employees, uses public hearings and a scoring system to prioritize awards, and conducts both desk and on-site monitoring, with annual audits to ensure compliance. No vote was taken on the CDFA item in the portion provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• of Joint Budget, they would adopt those same rules."
• were some allocations in category B.
• balanced budget proposal."
• some allocations in category B.
• balanced budget proposal.

Summary: The committee met to consider a long caption of House and Senate bills, first announcing a list of measures ready to be passed out and then taking up a special language subcommittee report. The report covered several bills, including SB 63, SB 67, SB 73, HB 1089, HB 1090, and HB 1093, along with amendments to a larger group of bills. A motion was made to pull HB 107 out separately, but after discussion about the amendment’s impact on school districts and the process for further debate, the substitute motion failed and the special language report was adopted. The committee then considered the revenue stabilization law and schedule. Staff explained that the main changes from the governor’s balanced budget proposal were moving county operations and higher education allocations from category B to category A, and described several fund transfers, including $100 million to Medicaid sustainability, $70 million to the Arkansas Children’s Educational Freedom account, $43.7 million to discretionary set-asides, $5 million to the motor vehicle set-aside, and two $150 million transfers related to the Quick Action Closing Fund and highway improvements. After questions about the schedule’s funding changes, the committee adopted the amendment and then passed House Bill 1100 and Senate Bill 75 as amended. Representative McClendon then presented a bill to support expansion of the Bella Vista Veterans Wall of Honor, requesting $400,000, but withdrew the bill, saying he would seek alternate funding. The committee then moved through the remaining captioned House and Senate bills, including HB 105, HB 107, HB 1008, HB 1022, HB 1035, HB 1036, HB 1037, HB 1051, HB 1052, HB 1064, HB 1066, HB 1068, HB 1089, HB 1090, HB 1093, and Senate Bills 3, 4, 7, 8, 15, 20, 21, 30, 31, 36, 41, 43, 58, 63, 67, 73, and 77, approving them with or without amendments as noted. The chair also announced that all prior holds had been released and said the next meeting would be a Joint Budget Committee meeting focused only on peer issues before adjourning.

Transcript Highlights:

• item, or state budget information item.
• We're starting to fill up the social services allocation.
• How much of the K-12 budget? Mr.
• In this case, just the Budget Stabilization Fund.
• Office of Management and Budget.

Keywords: 908, all

Transcript Highlights:

• So, in this budget, there were 10 positions that were budgeted as vacant.
• So, in this budget, there were 10 positions that were budgeted as vacant.
• In September, we allocated another $6 million, budgeted towards program spending.
• <01:19:04.400> that<01:19:04.679> allocation spending allocation that allocation spending
• c> is budget the recommended budget is budget the recommended budget is approved<04:20:59.080>

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The committee first heard the Banking Department’s fiscal year 2026-2027 budget presentation from Commissioner Amelia Galeri. She described the department as a self-funded consumer protection regulator overseeing two main areas: the Banking Trust Division, which supervises state-chartered banks, credit unions, and trust companies, and the Consumer Credit Division, which oversees more than 7,000 licensees including mortgage and money transmitter businesses. She said the department’s budget is about 86% salaries and benefits, with 53 positions all filled, and explained that the agency funds itself through fees, fines, and end-of-year assessments on regulated entities. Galeri said the department is facing workload growth from several directions: continued growth in the trust industry, increased fintech supervision, and a new requirement to regularly examine auto dealers that take finance applications, which adds about 300 exams over two fiscal years. She said the department was directed to flat-fund its budget based on 2025 levels but was allowed to increase travel and training. To stay within that limit, she said the department reduced office space, went paperless, converted administrative and licensing positions into examiner positions, and expects to defund an embedded DOJ database administrator position once a new SharePoint system is fully implemented. Members asked about how the department’s revenue and assessments work, including whether fees were increasing and how much existing banks would pay. Galeri said fees are not being raised, most banks pay little or no fines, and assessments are based largely on asset size, with trust companies paying the bulk. She also explained that fines are set by statute, generally capped at $2,500 per violation for consumer credit entities, and said she would not recommend increasing that cap. The committee then voted to accept the Banking Department’s budget proposal as presented in HQ1, with a motion and second and no discussion. The transcript then moved to the Department of Energy budget. Commissioner Jared Chakin and Chief of Operations Lenny Radio discussed federal program funding, including LIHEAP fuel assistance and weatherization. They said the apparent drop in fuel assistance funding from FY 2024 actuals to the budgeted amount is due to the loss of ARPA and CARES Act supplemental funds, while weatherization remains a federally constrained program with a waiting list and limited flexibility. Members also asked about a proposed transfer from the renewable energy fund; staff said the transfer would still allow the department to carry out its statutory duties for the year, though the committee deferred deeper discussion until House Bill 2.

Transcript Highlights:

• The budget does that by leaving a positive SFEU balance of $4.5 billion in budget year 2026-27 and $2.1
• Conservancy's budget.
• budget window.
• We ask that you fund the 211 California budget request for a $20 million one-time General Fund allocation
• We ask that you fund the 211 California budget request for a $20 million one-time General Fund allocation

Keywords: 987, senate, all

Summary: The subcommittee heard an overview of the May Revision from the Department of Finance and comments from the Legislative Analyst’s Office on the state’s overall budget condition and natural resources proposals. Finance said the May Revision keeps the budget balanced in 2026-27 and 2027-28, reduces the structural deficit, and includes major natural resources items such as Proposition 4 climate bond spending, including up to $125 million for the Golden Gate Fields acquisition, $23.2 million for wildlife refuge and wetland projects, $25 million for Healthy Rivers and Landscapes, $25 million for Bay-Delta environmental flows, $1 million for coexisting-with-wildlife work, and $2.5 million for cancer-risk research. The LAO said revenues remain strong but argued the budget still relies too heavily on reserves, recommended more savings and fewer new discretionary expenditures, and urged the Legislature to prioritize only urgent health and safety needs while planning for uncertainty in greenhouse gas reduction fund revenues. Members focused heavily on the Golden Gate Fields purchase, Healthy Rivers and Landscapes, the wildlife coexistence initiative, and cap-and-invest funding for transit. On Golden Gate Fields, agency officials said the property is a time-limited, once-in-a-generation opportunity, that the state’s contribution would help secure the acquisition, and that the land would ultimately transfer to East Bay Regional Park District, which would assume operations and maintenance. Officials said the site would be remediated by the current owner, the state would use deed restrictions to prevent commercial development, and the remaining purchase price would be covered by nonstate partners. On Healthy Rivers and Landscapes, Finance and the Natural Resources Agency said the $25 million would support scientific monitoring and early implementation of the Bay-Delta plan update, while the LAO questioned the timing and said the request was premature until the Water Board formally adopts the plan. The committee also discussed the coexisting-with-wildlife proposal and wolf-livestock conflict. Finance said the May Revision’s $1 million proposal would backfill existing funds to support limited-term staffing, deterrence tools, and conflict response, while members and the California Cattlemen’s Association said the need is larger and includes direct loss compensation, indirect loss compensation, and nonlethal deterrence. The Cattlemen’s Association said private insurance is limited and often inadequate for these losses. Members also raised concerns about the greenhouse gas reduction fund and transit, warning that lower auction revenues and possible CARB rule changes could leave major transit and other tier-three priorities underfunded. The LAO recommended planning for multiple revenue scenarios and reconsidering the current cap-and-invest spending framework. No votes or formal actions were taken in the hearing.

Transcript Highlights:

• it had to be allocated by December 31st. it had to be allocated by December 31st.
• Um, but again, the biggest change for liquor was that in this budget and last budget they transfer closer
• budget and last budget was that in this budget and last budget um<00:26:58.640> they<00:26:59.039
• not affect the b the banal budget not affect the b the banal budget currently<00:51:15.920> going
• :04.960> Bitcoin<01:21:05.679> because allocation into into Bitcoin because allocation

Keywords: 1191, senate, all