Transcript Highlights:

• Program, the Dairy Methane Reduction Program, and the Alternative Manure Management Program have delivered
• Habitat Program, our Organic Transition Program, and the Conservation Agriculture Planning Grant Program
• But, you know, the SWEEP Program, the farmer program, SALT program, those have all been beneficial.
• solid program.
• It's a great program.

Summary: The joint informational hearing examined how California agricultural programs have used cap-and-invest funding and what role agriculture should play in future climate investments. Committee chairs framed the issue as balancing climate goals, food production, rural economic vitality, and the fact that agriculture was not specifically funded in the recent cap-and-invest reauthorization. The first panel from CDFA and the Legislative Analyst’s Office described the state’s climate-smart agriculture portfolio, including Healthy Soils, SWEEP, the Dairy Methane Reduction Program, and Alternative Manure Management, and explained that GGRF revenues are now more constrained and may not fully support all tiered programs. LAO emphasized that agriculture is about 8% of California’s emissions, that most ag emissions are outside the cap, and that the Legislature should consider program effectiveness, the role of incentives, and GGRF priorities. CDFA testified that roughly $727 million has been invested in its flagship climate-smart ag programs, producing estimated reductions of 31 million metric tons of CO2e, 1.6 million acre-feet of water savings, and about 4,000 projects. The department said technical assistance is essential because farmers face risk when adopting new practices, and noted new Proposition 4 funding for Healthy Soils, SWEEP, and a regional farm equipment sharing program. University researchers then presented economic and methane-reduction analyses: UC Berkeley’s Dr. Hill described working landscapes as a major economic driver, while UC Davis’ Dr. Kibreab outlined dairy methane reduction pathways, including herd efficiency, digesters, alternative manure management, and emerging feed additives such as 3-NOP and seaweed, arguing that incentive-based programs have helped California move toward its methane goals. A later panel featured sharply different views on dairy digesters. Phoebe Seton argued that digesters worsen air and water quality, encourage manure liquefaction, and are an inefficient use of public funds, while CalCAN’s Brian Schobey and agricultural representatives said programs like AMP, SWEEP, Healthy Soils, FPIP, and the Farmer Program deliver measurable emissions reductions plus co-benefits such as water savings, lower energy costs, and improved air quality. Farm and industry witnesses stressed that stable, incentive-based funding helps family farms remain viable, supports co-investment, and should be treated as a partnership rather than a regulatory stick. No votes or formal actions were taken; the hearing ended with public comment and a continued call for future funding and policy discussion.

Transcript Highlights:

• The Healthy Rivers and Landscapes Program is a program of implementation.
• Next, the MDI program—again, this is a potentially big program.
• The MDI program, again, is a potentially big program.
• and the farmer program.
• and the SAFER program.

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

Transcript Highlights:

• program.
• And so we have a new NOFA program through our MHP program. So we are not at zero.
• We have a lot of programs.
• These are not abstract programs. in California. These are not abstract programs.
• low-income housing tax credit program and the multifamily housing program.

Summary: The subcommittee opened with remarks on the Senate’s budget plan for affordable housing and homelessness, including a proposed $2 billion housing investment and full funding for HHAP rounds 7 and 8. The first major item was the administration’s housing reorganization and trailer bill package, which would codify the new Housing Development and Finance Committee (HDFC), consolidate multifamily housing finance programs into a one-stop application and award process, and shift some authority over bonds, tax credits, and the Affordable Housing and Sustainable Communities program. Administration officials said the goal was to reduce duplication, speed projects from award to construction, and improve accountability by aligning financing decisions. The LAO generally supported the streamlining concept but recommended changes to the proposed bond set-aside and earlier reallocation of unused bond authority, and suggested preserving flexibility for integrated applications and reporting back on the proposed 70/30 split for housing versus sustainable communities funding. Committee members, especially Senator Cabaldon, raised concerns that the new committee structure could add process and delay, and questioned whether the proposal was effectively repurposing the climate-oriented ASIC program into a housing finance tool without enough direct investment in core housing programs. Administration witnesses responded that the structure was meant to create transparency, public accountability, and simultaneous financing awards, and said the proposal was only a first step in a broader consolidation effort. Members also asked about specific programs such as the Joe Serna Farm Worker Housing Grant Program and the Sustainable Agricultural Lands Conservation Program, and staff said those would remain within the broader streamlined framework or the flexible sustainable communities allocation. The committee then heard from CDLAC and TCAC on federal tax credit changes and state housing finance. Staff explained that H.R. 1 increased the federal 9% LIHTC allocation and, more importantly, lowered the bond-financing threshold for 4% credits from 50% to 25%, allowing California to finance many more projects. They reported emergency regulations were adopted quickly to implement the change, resulting in 195 projects and more than 25,000 units in the 4% program, while the 9% program funded 58 projects and nearly 3,000 units. Members asked about the value of the state low-income housing tax credit program and rehabilitation projects; staff said state credits remain important for filling financing gaps and that a portion of bond and credit resources is now set aside for acquisition and rehabilitation. Finally, the Civil Rights Department reported on the effects of federal civil rights rollbacks and on three limited-term or expiring programs: California vs. Hate, the Community Conflict Resolution Unit, and Investigations and Conciliation Enhancement. Director Kevin Kish said federal closures and funding cuts have increased demand on the department, which now has more than 12,000 open matters, up from 8,700 a year earlier, and a six-month wait for intake interviews despite overtime triage and early case screening. Members urged continued funding for the programs, arguing they are essential as federal protections weaken; department staff said California vs. Hate connects callers quickly to support services, the conflict resolution unit fills a gap left by the shuttered federal counterpart, and the limited-term investigators have helped reduce wait times even as filings continue to rise.

Transcript Highlights:

• These are our climate-smart agriculture programs and the farm to school program.
• These programs, namely the Regional Farm Equipment Sharing Program and the Tribal Food Sovereignty Program
• programs.
• Is Market Match in this program, or is that in a different program, the farmers' market match?
• And this... oh, the CNIP program, the Certified Nutrition Incentives Program.

Keywords: 987, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• The statewide program is fairly new compared to the district programs.
• When you mentioned DCAP, the statewide program is one component of the DCAP program.
• , the ZAP program.
• So we have a pilot program, $3 million in the e-bike program.
• SAFER, FPIP, agricultural waste programs, and methane reduction programs.

Summary: The committee hearing focused heavily on CARB’s broad trailer bill request for regulatory fee authority. Finance and CARB argued the proposal would let CARB develop fees to recover reasonable costs for implementing and enforcing regulations, while the LAO recommended rejection because the authority was too broad, could apply to an entire division of code, and would delegate core legislative taxing/fee-setting power without enough guardrails. Members from both parties raised concerns about the breadth of the authority, accountability, affordability impacts, and whether the Legislature would be put in an up-or-down position after CARB had already developed regulations. CARB responded that fees would still go through a budget change proposal and legislative approval before collection, and cited existing examples such as transport refrigeration units and commercial harborcraft fees. The committee then reviewed CARB’s request for permanent resources to implement SB 905 on carbon capture, utilization, storage, and carbon dioxide removal. CARB said the Legislature had previously authorized limited-term positions and funding, but it had struggled to recruit and retain staff with specialized regulatory and technical expertise, and that the work had included pre-rulemaking contracts, technology review, and permit-related preparation. Members questioned the pace of work, the use of limited-term positions, and whether additional permitting authority would be needed. CARB said it hoped to begin rulemaking later in the year if permanent resources were approved. Members also discussed the cap-and-trade spending plan, noting lower-than-expected auction revenues but higher interest earnings, and the need to monitor the Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund and possible May Revision changes. The committee then heard overviews of the zero-emission vehicle package, the Community Air Protection Program, demand-side grid support, and e-bike incentives. CARB described ongoing investments in community-based transportation equity, drayage trucks, harbor craft, and other clean technology demonstrations, while members pressed on affordability, program duplication, and whether enough funding was being directed to incentive programs. No formal votes were taken during the portion provided, and the chair repeatedly indicated that the hearing was intended to surface concerns for later budget negotiations.

Transcript Highlights:

• From the program.
• not a criminal justice program, a health care program.
• And this is Program, a health care program, and this is not just one person.
• This is a program regarding environmental assessments. This is a program.
• with respect to the program.

Summary: The Joint Legislative Audit Committee held an oversight hearing on the state auditor’s October 2024 report on California’s Forensic Conditional Release Program (CONREP) for sexually violent predators. Members and witnesses discussed public safety, the long delays in finding community housing, the role of local housing committees, and the Department of State Hospitals’ oversight of Liberty Healthcare, which operates much of the program. Several legislators from rural and high-desert districts said their communities have been disproportionately affected by placements and questioned why many placements end up in remote areas. State Auditor Grant Parks said the audit found that CONREP participants were convicted of new offenses less often than sexually violent predators who were unconditionally released, but that 18 of 56 participants had been revoked and returned to state hospitals for noncompliance. He said it took an average of 17 months to place current participants in the community, with 20 additional people awaiting placement for an average of 20 months, and that the program incurred significant pre-placement costs. Parks also said local officials were often unclear about their role, DSH had not given clear guidance at the time of the audit, and California lacks a transitional housing option used in some other states. He reported that DSH had implemented four of the five audit recommendations, while declining the recommendation to explore state-owned transitional housing. DSH Director Stephanie Clendendon and Liberty representative Ken Carabello defended the program as a court-ordered, highly supervised treatment model intended to reduce reoffending and support reintegration. They said DSH is actively involved in placement review, that Liberty searches countywide under statutory restrictions, and that community feedback and court approval are part of the process. DSH said it has now implemented guidance for housing committee designees, formal program reviews, an outcome tracker, and an analysis of whether to separate some Liberty services into different contracts. DSH continued to oppose transitional housing, arguing it would not solve the core siting and statutory problems and would add cost. Several members remained critical, arguing the program is broken, costly, and unfairly concentrated in certain communities, and some called for major statutory changes or suspension of the program.

Transcript Highlights:

• They also go to a program that's called the Trade Corridor Enhancement Program.
• programs.
• programs.
• the 617 program.
• These programs were...

Keywords: 988, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Over the years, programs such as the Healthy Soils Program, the Soil Program, the State Water Efficiency
• Program, the Dairy Methane Reduction Program, and the Alternative Manure Management Program have delivered
• Habitat Program, our Organic Transition Program, and the Conservation Agriculture Planning Grant Program
• But, you know, the SWEEP program, the FARMER program, SALT program, those have all been beneficial.
• solid program.

Keywords: 987, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Home Program.
• Home Program.
• Each of these programs provide home safe and the Bringing Families Home Program.
• They're not new programs per se.
• But not any programs. No programs are going to be additional.

Summary: The Budget Subcommittee on Health and Human Services heard a series of budget items focused first on the California Department of Aging and then on the Department of Social Services. For Aging, the director reported the state is at the midpoint of the Master Plan for Aging, with about 300 initiatives launched and roughly three-quarters completed, nearly $1 billion invested, and expanded local planning, research, and stakeholder engagement. The committee also discussed HICAP modernization, which would add ongoing funding from the Special HICAP Fund to expand Medicare counseling capacity, and senior meal programs, including support for virtual congregate/to-go meals and the use of prior one-time nutrition investments. The chair raised concerns about federal H.R. 1 and its downstream effects on older adults, food assistance, and other safety-net programs, and the department said its direct budget was not affected but that other programs serving older adults could be under pressure. The committee then reviewed multiple CDSS proposals. These included implementing the federal Medicaid Access Rule by creating a statewide grievance process and critical incident reporting system for IHSS and other home- and community-based services; housing and homelessness programs such as CalWORKs Housing Support, Housing and Disability Advocacy, Home Safe, and Bringing Families Home, where the department described strong outcomes but warned that one-time funding is expiring and services are scaling back; and permanent position authority for the Housing and Homelessness Division. Members also heard about the facility management system modernization for Community Care Licensing, home care services branch solvency and regulation work, child care centers in multifamily housing, the Seizure Emergency Response Act, licensing during emergencies and disasters, the Family Preparedness Plan Act, and social services automation projects including CalSAWS, the enterprise data pipeline, and CalWORKs child support notices. The LAO and Department of Finance generally had no additional comments or were still reviewing several requests. A notable exchange occurred on the Community Care Licensing item, where Senator Grove pressed the department about the Autumn Oaks facility in Tulare County, citing dozens of complaints and severe conditions affecting seniors. The department said it had worked with the county and ombudsman on relocation, was reviewing what went wrong, and had authority to pursue administrative action even after a license surrender. The hearing ended with a stakeholder presentation from the California Association of Area Agencies on Aging supporting a $62.3 million Older Californians Act request, followed by public comment from advocates for housing, Meals on Wheels, HICAP, Home Safe, and H-DAP. The subcommittee adjourned without taking votes, and all items were held open.

Transcript Highlights:

• program.
• And so we are, we have a new NOFA program through our MHP program. So we are not at zero.
• We have a lot of programs.
• program, the CERNA Farm Worker Program, and the homeless housing rescue fund.
• low-income housing tax credit program and the multifamily housing program.

Keywords: 987, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• programs.
• Program, which is a federal program, and the Multifamily Mortgage Revenue Bond Program, which is also
• program, which is a local program to administer resources.
• We established criteria that excluded federal programs, programs similar to existing Florida programs
• Three programs had high potential, four programs had medium potential, and six programs had low potential

Committee: Senate Community Affairs

Summary: The Committee on Community Affairs held its first meeting and heard presentations focused on affordable housing implementation under the Live Local Act. Florida Housing Finance Corporation described its role in administering rental and homeownership programs, including SAIL, SHIP, the Low-Income Housing Tax Credit program, disaster recovery efforts, supportive housing, and the Live Local funding and tax incentives. Officials said the first year’s $150 million Live Local rental allocation was fully committed to 23 developments producing 3,171 units with mixed-income set-asides, and they outlined how projects were selected through competitive solicitations tied to statutory priorities such as mixed-use development, publicly owned land, foster youth, rural areas of opportunity, redevelopment, and housing near military installations. They also discussed the tax credit contribution program, the missing-middle property tax exemption, sales tax rebates, and the year-one ad valorem exemption for qualifying affordable projects. Members asked detailed questions about the data and program design, including the use of area median income figures, per-unit subsidy levels, county targeting, tenant relocation during redevelopment, and whether the programs were helping lower-income households. Florida Housing said it uses competitive scoring and data from the Schimberg Center and that redevelopment projects are supposed to include tenant relocation plans. The homeownership portion of the presentation covered the Hometown Heroes program, which provides down payment and closing cost assistance to first-time homebuyers, with exceptions for active-duty military and veterans. Staff said the program has assisted more than 21,000 families and leveraged over $6.5 billion in first mortgages, and members asked about repayment rates, credit scores, and whether participants were staying in homes long enough to show the program was serving intended buyers. The committee then heard from OPAGA on two required Live Local evaluations: affordable housing strategies in other states and affordable housing policies in Florida. OPAGA reported that Florida has a high share of cost-burdened households, with 1.5 million households cost burdened and 1.4 million severely cost burdened, and that Florida’s counties and municipalities reported more than $1.4 billion in affordable housing expenditures in fiscal year 2023-24. The report identified 13 innovative out-of-state programs, with three considered high-potential for Florida implementation, and summarized Florida local government practices such as SHIP-funded homeownership and rental assistance, expedited permitting, mixed-income zoning, rehabilitation programs, and interlocal cooperation. No votes were taken, and the meeting adjourned after the presentations and questions.

Transcript Highlights:

• program.
• That the program.
• Hate program.
• Hate program.
• low-income housing tax credit program and the multifamily housing program.

Summary: The subcommittee heard an extensive presentation on the administration’s housing reorganization proposal, which would centralize multifamily affordable housing finance under the new Housing Development and Finance Committee (HDFC) and align it with the Governor’s trailer bill language. Administration officials said the plan is intended to create a one-stop application and award process, reduce duplicative timelines and costs, and pair state subsidy with private activity bonds and federal tax credits more efficiently. They also described proposed changes to the Affordable Housing and Sustainable Communities program, including shifting a larger share of funding toward housing-related awards while preserving a portion for sustainable communities investments. The Legislative Analyst’s Office generally supported the streamlining concept but recommended changes to the proposed bond set-aside timing and urged flexibility for integrated applications and future reporting on demand. Senators, especially Senator Cabaldon, raised concerns that the proposal could weaken the original climate-and-transportation purpose of the sustainable communities program and that the reorganization would be undercut by the lack of new housing production funding in the budget. The item was held open without a vote. The committee then received a report from the California Debt Limit Allocation Committee and the California Tax Credit Allocation Committee on federal and state housing tax credits. Staff explained that the federal H.R. 1 change lowering the bond-financing threshold from 50% to 25% greatly expanded the number of projects able to use the 4% federal tax credit, allowing California to fund many more projects and units. They also described the state low-income housing tax credit as an important gap-filling tool for projects that still need additional subsidy, and noted existing set-asides for rural, homeless, at-risk, and extremely low-income projects. Members discussed rehabilitation as well as new construction, and the item was informational only. Finally, the Civil Rights Department reported on the effects of federal civil rights policy changes and on three programs facing expiration: California vs. Hate, the Community Conflict Resolution Unit, and Investigations and Conciliation Enhancement. Director Kevin Kish said federal cuts and policy shifts have reduced support for fair housing and other civil rights functions, while CRD’s caseload has grown from about 8,700 open matters a year ago to more than 12,000, with a six-month wait for interviews despite overtime triage efforts. Senators expressed strong support for continuing the programs and concern about the broader federal rollback of civil rights enforcement. The department said it is using overtime, intake triage, and outreach partnerships to manage the workload and direct Californians to appropriate state, local, and nonprofit resources.

Transcript Highlights:

• Home Program.
• Home Program.
• Each of these programs provide home safe and the Bringing Families Home Program.
• They're not new programs per se.
• But not any programs. No programs are going to be additional.

Summary: The Budget Subcommittee on Health and Human Services heard an overview from the California Department of Aging on the state’s Master Plan for Aging, including progress at the five-year midpoint, local aging and disability action plans, HCBS gap analysis, workforce work, and stakeholder engagement. The Legislative Analyst’s Office noted the department’s budget was relatively flat but flagged federal H.R. 1 pressure on nutrition-related programs. Members discussed how H.R. 1 and broader federal and state budget pressures could affect older adults through other programs, even where the Department of Aging itself had no direct cut. The committee also heard a stakeholder request from the California Association of Area Agencies on Aging for $62.3 million to support Older Californians Act services, with Finance cautioning that any added ongoing spending would worsen out-year deficits. The committee then reviewed several Department of Aging proposals, including HICAP modernization to add paid counselors and reduce reliance on volunteers, and senior meal program oversight for virtual congregate/to-go meals under AB 1476. Members also discussed the status of area agencies on aging in Ventura, Santa Barbara, and San Luis Obispo counties, including a new RFP process in the Central Coast and the need to protect service continuity during transitions. Finance clarified that remaining modernizing Older Californians Act nutrition funds can still be used through June 2029. The Department of Social Services presented a series of items. These included new federal Medicaid Access Rule implementation for IHSS grievance and critical incident systems; housing and homelessness programs for CalWORKs Housing Support, HDAP, Home Safe, and Bringing Families Home, with testimony that one-time funds are expiring and service levels will likely decline; permanent position authority for housing and homelessness administration; a facility management system to replace aging licensing systems; home care services branch solvency and regulations; child care centers in multifamily housing; the Seizure Emergency Response Act; licensing during emergencies and disasters; and the Family Preparedness Plan Act. The committee also heard a detailed exchange about the Autumn Oaks facility in Tulare County, where Senator Grove raised concerns about 53 complaints and the handling of unsafe conditions; CDSS said it is reviewing the matter and has authority to take administrative action even after a license surrender. No votes were taken, and items were held open.

Transcript Highlights:

• These efforts include the California Wildfire Mitigation Program, a program primarily focused on home
• the pilot program, but I... ...program in terms of the funding for the pilot program, but I question
• This was a great program.
• and expanding this program?
• So the pilot program taught us some things, but to what end do we keep expanding this program?

Summary: The Assembly Budget Subcommittee on Climate Crisis, Resources, Energy, and Transportation held an oversight hearing on home hardening and defensible space as wildfire mitigation strategies. The chair opened by stressing that California has reached a tipping point, with repeated community-scale wildfire losses, rising insurance costs, and growing utility wildfire mitigation expenses. The hearing was organized around four panels: what home hardening and defensible space are, community risk reduction and coordination, evaluation of current defensible space programs and proposed investments, and the future of home hardening and the California Wildfire Mitigation Program. The first panel featured IBHS, the Legislative Analyst’s Office, and local wildfire mitigation advocates. IBHS described wildfire spread through embers, flames, and radiant heat, emphasizing that structure separation, removing combustible materials within the first five feet of a home, and combining multiple mitigation measures significantly reduce loss. It highlighted its Wildfire Prepared Home and Wildfire Prepared Neighborhood standards, including an “essential” and “enhanced” level, and said California is ahead of other states but still needs scalable, standardized, and sustainably funded mitigation. The LAO outlined key policy questions for the Legislature, including the state’s role, intergovernmental coordination, cost-effectiveness, program design, measurement of success, long-term sustainability, and barriers to implementation. The chair and panelists discussed estimated costs, including roughly $15,000 for a basic retrofit and about $50,000 for more extensive ignition-resistant construction, and whether state funding should focus on the most cost-effective initial measures. The second panel focused on scaling adoption through local coordination, education, financing, and community-based programs. Megafire Action argued that home hardening is a market adoption problem and said the state should not try to pay for every home, but instead target high-leverage interventions across the “customer journey,” including education, financing, trusted certification, and neighborhood network effects. Ventura Regional Fire Safe Council described free home assessments, small retrofit grants, Firewise community support, and the importance of neighborhood-level action, local capacity, and cultural change. Marin Wildfire Prevention Authority described its locally funded model, grant program, public education efforts, and an Ember Ready program that helps residents navigate home hardening and Zone Zero compliance. The chair repeatedly emphasized the need for a coordinated statewide marketing campaign, stronger incentives, better insurance discounts, and more use of local, utility, federal, and private funding sources. The third and fourth panels addressed Cal Fire’s defensible space inspection program, the proposed defensible space financial assistance program, and broader state investments. Cal Fire said homes lacking compliant defensible space are far more likely to be damaged or destroyed and requested ongoing funding and staffing to stabilize inspections statewide; the LAO suggested the Legislature consider alternative funding sources such as GGRF or a reinstated SRA fee. Cal Fire and the State Fire Marshal explained that Zone Zero sets a minimum standard, local governments cannot go below it, and grant prioritization will favor jurisdictions that submit inspections. Cal Fire also said the new defensible space financial assistance program would focus on ember-resistant zone-zero work and, in the Southern California counties covered by the legislation, would assist about 3,125 homes at an estimated $8,000 per home. In the final panel, the State Fire Marshal described California’s layered strategy of parcel-level home hardening, defensible space, and neighborhood-scale mitigation, along with technical support, financial assistance, and incentives such as insurance discounts and builder marketing. The overall theme was that California must move from isolated efforts to a coordinated, science-based, and scalable statewide approach to reduce wildfire losses.

Transcript Highlights:

• They also go to a program that's called the Trade Corridor Enhancement Program.
• programs.
• programs.
• the 617 Program.
• These programs were...

Summary: The meeting began with a budget subcommittee hearing on a proposed sustainable aviation fuel (SAF) tax credit trailer bill. Assembly Members Ávila Farías and another member spoke in support, emphasizing union jobs, refinery investments, and the need to decarbonize aviation. The Department of Finance said the Governor’s proposal would provide a $1 to $2 per gallon credit against the diesel excise tax for SAF sold in California from 2026 to 2036. The Legislative Analyst’s Office recommended rejecting the proposal, arguing it is a relatively expensive way to reduce emissions, has uncertain environmental benefits, could significantly reduce transportation revenues, and conflicts with the spirit of voter restrictions on transportation taxes. Committee members questioned whether the credit would mainly benefit out-of-state producers, whether firms would have diesel tax liability to use the credit, and whether the proposal would shift production away from renewable diesel and raise fuel prices. Administration and CARB staff said the credit is intended to support aviation decarbonization, preserve jobs, and help keep California on track toward its 2045 climate goals. LAO and UC Berkeley testimony countered that the policy could mostly subsidize existing technologies, that feedstock supply is limited, and that the net emissions benefit may be small relative to the cost. Members also asked about the effect on local streets and roads, SHOP, and trade corridor funding; Finance estimated a $165 million annual revenue impact would reduce those programs, while LAO said the reductions would mean fewer projects over time. No vote was taken, and the chair said the issue would remain open for further discussion. The committee then moved to a zero-emission vehicle incentive trailer bill proposing a one-time $200 million appropriation to CARB for a new point-of-sale incentive program focused on first-time buyers and leases of new and used light-duty ZEVs. Supporters said the program would help offset the loss of the federal EV tax credit, maintain momentum in California’s ZEV transition, and use a one-to-one match with participating automakers to double the state’s investment. LAO recommended rejection, saying the proposal does not meet the high budget bar this year, lacks enough program detail to evaluate, is unlikely to move sales significantly given the size of the appropriation, and could duplicate existing state and utility programs. Members asked about current incentives across light-, medium-, and heavy-duty sectors, the recent decline in ZEV sales, and whether the program would help lower-income buyers rather than subsidize purchases that would have happened anyway. CARB said the proposal is meant to fill a gap in the light-duty market, where sales fell sharply after the federal credit expired, and noted existing programs for other vehicle classes. The Department of Finance also addressed a separate question about the Motor Vehicle Account, saying a previously planned GGRF transfer was no longer needed because updated forecasts showed the fund had sufficient balances, though LAO said the account still has a structural long-term imbalance. The discussion ended before any vote or action on the ZEV proposal.

Transcript Highlights:

• You alluded to the demand-side grid support program, the DSGS program.
• Next, the distributed energy backup assets program, what we call our DIBA program.
• We're looking at, you know, the DOE's program is an eight-year program.
• programs.
• in other government programs like the lunch program, Medi-Cal, Medicare, those type of programs.

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

Transcript Highlights:

• dual credit programs.
• in the program.
• funding for programs like the Golden State Teacher Program.
• is the leadership program.
• is the leadership program.

Summary: The Senate Budget Subcommittee on Education heard the Governor’s proposals on dual enrollment, reading difficulty screeners, special education, school facilities, and Commission on Teacher Credentialing programs. On dual enrollment, the Department of Finance described a $100 million one-time Proposition 98 investment to expand the Dual Enrollment Opportunities Grant Program, along with changes to make regional occupational centers eligible, add funding for justice-involved youth, prioritize higher-need LEAs, support teacher professional development, and reduce daily instructional minute requirements for some dual enrollment students. The LAO recommended rejecting the new funding as not clearly addressing implementation barriers, while CDE supported the proposal and suggested reserving $10 million for technical assistance. Committee members and public commenters generally supported the expansion, with some asking for technical assistance and broader access, including adult dual enrollment. The committee also reviewed a $40 million one-time Proposition 98 proposal for reading difficulty screener implementation and related trailer bill language that would require screening after 91 school days for kindergarten and 46 school days for grades 1-2. Finance said the timing was intended to reduce over-identification and align with evidence from preliminary data; the LAO recommended rejecting the funding and redirecting it to a discretionary block grant. CDE supported the funding and the general approach but acknowledged the need for local support and training. Several committee members and public witnesses raised concerns that the proposed timing restrictions were too rigid and could delay early intervention, while others supported the delay as a way to improve accuracy and avoid misidentification. For special education, Finance proposed ongoing Proposition 98 increases to adjust for COLA and enrollment changes and to raise the statewide special education base rate to $99 per ADA, equalizing rates across SELPAs. The LAO said the proposal should be adopted but estimated it could be funded for less than the Governor’s figure. CDE and multiple local education representatives strongly supported the increase, citing rising special education enrollment, cost pressures, and large local funding gaps. The committee also heard a brief overview of the school facilities proposal, which continues $1.5 billion in Proposition 2 bond funding for the School Facility Program; OPSC reported significant remaining bond authority but also substantial pending demand, and explained that natural disaster school rebuilding draws from the broader new construction and modernization pools. Finally, the committee reviewed Commission on Teacher Credentialing proposals, including the already-funded $300 million Student Teacher Stipend Program, new state operations resources for misconduct investigations and grant administration, and a $250 million one-time continuation of the Teacher Residency Grant Program. CTC said its grants management system is ready and that it expects better data tracking; public testimony broadly supported the educator workforce investments and urged continued funding for the Golden State Teacher Grant Program and additional support for rural and leadership pipeline programs. No votes were taken, and the hearing adjourned after public testimony.

Transcript Highlights:

• </c> the programs.
• Not every single program the programs.
• And programs facility.
• So there may be a recommendation for a certain type of program, but then there's an programs, programs
• Um programs.

Keywords: 924, joint, all

Transcript Highlights:

• , our training program, the broader technical assistance that we provide, and then a couple program updates
• Various dollar amounts for the different programs, but in general there's a program here for just about
• Various dollar amounts for the different programs, but in general there's a program here for just about
• And on to a couple program highlights. First, the Children Pedestrian Safety Program.
• I said the program started in 2022, so not quite three years, actually, of the program to have 91 complete

Committee: Senate Transportation

Summary: The committee heard testimony on House Bill 533, which would eliminate the vehicle registration sticker program. The sponsor said the stickers are often unreadable or obscured, law enforcement already runs plates during stops, and the change would save the Idaho Transportation Department an estimated $300,000 while keeping the agency neutral. Senators asked about other states that have ended sticker programs and the original purpose of the stickers; the sponsor said the visual color system was once used to identify expired registrations, but that is no longer effective. The committee moved the bill to the Senate floor with a due pass recommendation, and the motion carried. The committee also introduced RS 33330, sponsored by Senator Hart, to clarify what constitutes a valid right-of-way and highway. Hart described a recent Shoshone County dispute involving an old, incomplete road process and a vague legal description that led to litigation over access across private property. The proposal would require a record, survey, and public hearing process, and would make clear that counties or highway districts are not obligated to maintain every public right-of-way. The motion to introduce the RS passed. Members then received an update from the Local Highway Technical Assistance Council (ELTAC). The administrator reviewed the agency’s role serving cities, counties, and highway districts through training, technical assistance, and administration of federal and state transportation programs. She highlighted federal aid projects, the T2 training center, grant-writing assistance, the Children Pedestrian Safety Program, and the Leading Idaho Local Bridge Program, noting major investments, completed bridge projects, and the use of state funds to accelerate repairs and reduce local taxpayer burden. The committee asked about ELTAC’s coordination with ITD and how local governments seek funding help. Finally, the committee approved the February 10, 2026 minutes and adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• We know how essential these preschool programs are to the very functioning of our these preschool programs
• universal preschool programs.
• of these programs.
• program.
• Which matches the CDSS program.

Summary: The joint hearing focused on California’s child care, preschool, and transitional kindergarten oversight, with chairs emphasizing the state’s Master Plan for Early Learning and Care and the need to break down silos between programs. CDSS and CDE reported progress toward the plan’s goals, including universal access to TK for all four-year-olds next school year, expanded access for low-income three-year-olds, and more children with disabilities being served in state preschool. They also noted ongoing work on quality rating/review reform, funding structure changes, and the need to address rates, workforce shortages, and federal uncertainty around Head Start. Testimony from advocacy groups and providers largely supported expanding access while simplifying the system. Children Now, Every Child California, and the California Budget and Policy Center argued that California still has uneven access, especially for infants, toddlers, and three-year-olds, and urged investments in mixed delivery, inclusion, full-day options, and a cost-of-care rate methodology. Every Child California recommended consolidating part-day and full-day contracts, streamlining eligibility priorities, making the two-year-old option permanent, and funding staffing incentives. Parent testimony highlighted how child care gaps and county-to-county transfer delays can disrupt work, safety, and children’s stability, and providers described low reimbursement rates, the need for health and retirement benefits, and support for delinking subsidy rates from private pay. The second panel addressed universal transitional kindergarten. The Learning Policy Institute reported rapid TK expansion, with most districts now offering TK, but said access still depends on facilities, staffing, and whether programs are available at all school sites. The Department of Finance said the governor’s budget would fully implement TK by adding funding for all eligible four-year-olds and lowering the adult-to-child ratio from 12:1 to 10:1. The Legislative Analyst’s Office said the administration’s enrollment and cost assumptions were optimistic and estimated lower TK enrollment growth and lower costs for the ratio change. CDE supported the expansion and urged continued funding for UPK coordinators, teacher development, and mixed-delivery planning grants. Members questioned facilities shortages, staffing competition, and how to ensure TK expansion does not displace CSPP or Head Start classrooms. No formal votes or actions were taken in the hearing.