Transcript Highlights:

• relative to the Governor's budget.
• relative to the Governor's budget.
• relative to the Governor's budget.
• window over the Budget Act.
• I also want to add that it's not included in the education budget, but on the other side of the budget

Keywords: 987, senate, all

Summary: The committee heard the Governor’s May Revision proposals for TK-12 education, beginning with a Proposition 98 overview from the Department of Finance and the Legislative Analyst’s Office. Finance said the May Revision increases the Proposition 98 minimum guarantee by about $6.4 billion relative to the Governor’s January budget across the three-year window, with higher guarantees in each year, continued full payment of the outstanding settle-up obligation in 2024-25, and a reduced $3.9 billion settle-up amount in 2025-26. Finance also described larger mandatory and discretionary deposits into the Proposition 98 reserve, ending with an estimated $10.3 billion reserve balance. The LAO said the overall estimates were reasonable, but urged the state to fully fund the guarantee and use other budget tools, including reserves, to manage volatility rather than delay settle-up payments. Members questioned the remaining settle-up amount, the risk of revenue volatility, and possible alternatives such as advance payments or other reserve strategies. The second panel covered Department of Education proposals and trailer bill language. Finance outlined additional state operations funding and positions for CDE, along with trailer bill changes affecting community schools, preschool, literacy, special education, charter accountability, teacher-related programs, and other technical cleanups. The LAO supported the overall structure of the package but recommended changes to several items, including rejecting some additional one-time community schools, literacy, math, multilingual screener, and inclusive college proposals, while supporting the ongoing LCFF and special education increases and raising concerns about the paid pregnancy disability leave proposal’s cost and implementation complexity. CDE supported the special education increase, community schools, literacy and math investments, homelessness funding, and the paid pregnancy leave proposal, while asking for more funding for county office support, clearer homelessness definitions, and continued preschool parity. Members also asked about immigrant student supports, community schools reporting, and the rationale and cost estimate for the paid pregnancy leave proposal, which Finance estimated at $218 million annually. The final panel addressed the Commission on Teacher Credentialing. Finance proposed additional legal staffing for SB 848 implementation and educator misconduct caseloads, a fee increase for clear credential renewals from $100 to $125, a $5 million one-time Proposition 98 investment to build a transcript review platform, $2 million ongoing for transcript review staffing, and $30 million one-time for the statewide residency technical assistance center. The LAO had no concerns about the legal staffing, supported the transcript review platform if the fee increase and ongoing staffing were adopted, and recommended rejecting the residency technical assistance center expansion because existing funding runs through 2029. The Commission explained that the misconduct workload has grown over several years, that AI would assist but not replace human review in transcript matching, and that the residency technical assistance center helps recruit and retain teachers and support rural districts. Public commenters largely supported special education, discretionary block grants, community schools, literacy investments, homelessness funding, and teacher credentialing alternatives, while some urged rejection of the settle-up proposal and preschool COLA reduction.

Transcript Highlights:

• actually prior budget language.
• sections that look a lot like the budget sections that look a lot like the budget uh<00:25:58.320
• allocation of searchcharge funds. allocation of searchcharge funds.
• <00:33:04.320> of is the a change in the allocation of is the a change in the allocation of
• <00:48:33.760> budgets a couple of different allocation budgets a couple of different allocation

Bills: HF2438

Keywords: transportation finance, transportation policy, MnDOT, Minnesota Department of Transportation, Department of Public Safety, Metropolitan Council, highway funding, trunk highway fund, county state-aid highway fund, municipal state-aid street fund, state aid roads, local roads, bridge funding, road construction, transit funding, passenger rail, freight rail, aviation, airport development, safe routes to school

Transcript Highlights:

• governor after that, that This roadmap provides you all with a level of consistency in policy and budget
• We allocated 18.6 million for attendance issues.
• To just education planning in general and specifically budget planning.
• Let me Um, Some of the allocation based on allocation-based awards.
• Um, they also have a special allocation that was awarded in two sessions ago by Senator Munoz.

Transcript Highlights:

• Their first one is transparency, meaning that state aid is allocated using a formula that is simple,
• In FY 2025, they received $2.4 billion for K-12 education for this allocation.
• In FY 2025, they received $2.4 billion for K-12 education for this allocation.
• So ADE tabulates their budget request, and they present it to you all during budget hearings, accommodating
• there to create the full Public School Fund allocation for the year.

Summary: The House and Senate Education Committee first approved minutes from February 2 and 3, then took up an interim study proposal on adult education and the Excel Center model. Representatives from Goodwill Industries of Arkansas, the Excel Center network, and the University of Notre Dame’s Lab for Economic Opportunities testified that roughly 300,000 Arkansans over age 19 lack a high school diploma or GED, and argued that the Excel Center provides a supported diploma pathway for adults who struggle with GED testing. Witnesses highlighted wraparound services such as free child care, transportation assistance, tutoring, life coaching, and career services, and cited outcomes including high retention, growing enrollment, and research showing higher employment and earnings and lower criminal justice involvement for graduates. Committee members raised questions about the state’s role, existing adult education programs, and how the study would be structured; the motion to adopt the ISP passed, though there was some procedural disagreement about when questions should have been taken. The committee then heard a detailed adequacy funding overview from BLR staff Katie Walden and Adrian Beck on Arkansas K-12 education finance. They reviewed national funding principles and explained Arkansas’s system, including state and local revenue sources, the Public School Fund, the Educational Excellence Trust Fund, the Educational Adequacy Fund, and the Facilities Partnership Program. Staff said K-12 state and local revenues totaled $6.6 billion in 2025, with foundation funding making up the largest share of district and charter funding, followed by additional, categorical, and supplemental funds. They also explained the matrix-based foundation formula, the role of the uniform rate of tax, and how categorical and supplemental funds support areas such as alternative learning, English learners, special education high-cost cases, teacher salary equalization, declining enrollment, and student growth. Members asked several follow-up questions about how specific funding categories are defined and used, including student support staff, instructional aides, special education high-cost occurrences, ALE funding, teacher salary equalization, and the inclusion of Excel Center amounts in state-local funding totals. Staff said some of those details would be addressed in a later presentation and offered to provide additional records, including district lists and historical information. The meeting ended after the funding overview, with no additional votes or actions beyond the ISP adoption and adjournment.

Transcript Highlights:

• You can respond, but I don't see, in this tight budget environment, it being appropriate to allocate
• Budget accounts. Thank you.
• That funding allocation has slowly declined.
• the budget year, but not in the budget year plus one, as we call it.
• Of budget authority for the project.

Keywords: 988, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Efficiency, which means that the system aligns resource allocation...
• presents her balanced budget to you all.
• ADE tabulates their budget request and they present it to you all during budget hearings, accommodating
• there, to create the full Public School Fund allocation for the year.
• All three of those allocations go into the DESE Fund account.

Keywords: 1204, all

Summary: The House and Senate Education Committee first approved minutes from February 2 and 3, then heard an interim study proposal on Arkansas adult education, presented by Goodwill Industries of Arkansas and the Excel Center network. Witnesses described the state’s adult diploma gap, arguing that roughly 300,000 Arkansans over age 19 lack a high school diploma or GED and that the Excel Center provides a supported, diploma-based alternative with child care, transportation help, tutoring, and career services. Goodwill officials said the Arkansas campuses are the state’s only public adult charter high schools, are not state-funded, and have produced strong enrollment growth and graduation outcomes. A University of Notre Dame researcher testified that a study of Excel Center graduates found higher employment and earnings, more credential and college-credit attainment, and lower criminal justice involvement, with a high estimated return on public investment. Some members questioned the framing of Arkansas’s adult education challenges and whether the state was being portrayed too negatively, while others asked about wraparound services and the role of nonprofit providers. The committee ultimately adopted the interim study proposal, though there was some procedural confusion and debate about whether questions should have come before the vote. The committee then received a detailed Bureau of Legislative Research presentation on Arkansas K-12 education funding as part of the adequacy study. Staff reviewed national funding principles and Arkansas’s funding structure, including state, local, and other revenues; the Public School Fund; Department of Education operations; and the Facilities Partnership Program. They explained that 2025 K-12 state and local revenues totaled about $6.6 billion, with foundation funding, categorical funding, supplemental funding, and additional funding distributed to districts and charters. The presentation covered the matrix used to calculate foundation funding, the role of the uniform rate of tax, the Educational Excellence Trust Fund, the Educational Adequacy Fund, and how charter schools are funded differently from traditional districts. Staff also discussed categorical programs such as alternative learning environments, English learner funding, enhanced student achievement, and professional development, as well as supplemental categories including transportation, special education high-cost occurrences, teacher salary equalization, declining enrollment, and student growth. Members asked numerous questions about the funding formulas, the meaning of specific staffing categories, how categorical funds are used, and the number of districts receiving teacher salary equalization or ALE funding. One member noted that the Excel Center’s funding appeared in the broader state-local totals and asked for clarification. Staff said some of the more detailed spending questions would be addressed in the next day’s presentation and offered to provide follow-up information, including district lists and historical changes. The meeting ended after the chair noted that the department was present mainly to answer questions, not to deliver a separate update, and no further business was taken up before adjournment.

Transcript Highlights:

• Everybody who loves Budget Sub 5, your favorite budget committee.
• Welcome to the Assembly Budget Subcommittee No. 5 on State Administration hearing today.
• So we respectfully ask that the funding for this program be retained in the final budget.
• We're asking for an allocation of $150,000 so that they can get that system up and running.
• So we just ask for consideration of that $150,000 allocation. Thank you.

Summary: The Assembly Budget Subcommittee No. 5 on State Administration heard a series of budget change proposals and trailer bill items, beginning with Housing and Community Development (HCD) requests. HCD sought permanent authority for seven existing temporary positions to support the HCD Connect IT system, and a separate proposal to fund implementation of eight 2025 housing-related laws with $4.2 million General Fund and 16 positions, plus $470,000 one-time General Fund. Members asked about how HCD Connect would interact with programs moving to the new Housing Development Finance Committee, and HCD also explained that the estimated cost to implement AB 1053 had been revised downward from about $6 million to $1.9 million because of shared implementation with CalHFA and the new committee structure. The committee also heard a Cal ICH proposal for $339,000 one-time General Fund to implement AB 678 on LGBTQ+ inclusive and culturally competent homelessness services, with testimony emphasizing data gaps and the need for a contract-based approach because HMIS cannot be changed unilaterally. The Department of Financial Protection and Innovation presented three continuation proposals: $15.34 million and 53 positions for the California Consumer Financial Protection Law program, $13.5 million and 51 positions for the Debt Collector Licensing Act program, and $49,000 ongoing for two positions in the broker-dealer/investment adviser education program. Members and the public raised concerns about the size and fairness of debt collector assessments and licensing fees, while DFPI explained the pro rata fee structure, the current license count, and how larger assessments fall on larger firms. Public testimony also supported retaining funding for the Student Loan Empowerment Network and requested funding for a franchise broker registration program. The committee also considered a mandate item involving suspension of a disclosure requirement related to property taxation, and trailer bill language from the Government Operations Agency to amend AB 91 on MENA demographic data collection, with the administration emphasizing data nondisclosure, protection of federal funding, and delayed implementation. The Secretary of State’s office then presented Help America Vote Act funding requests: $10.3 million for VoteCal maintenance and operations and $4.492 million for HAVA spending plans supporting voter education, training, accessibility, auditing, and county assistance. The office also requested $660,000 General Fund to implement AB 1392, which would make voter registration information for elected officials and candidates confidential, and explained the need to modify VoteCal and county election systems. The committee also heard requests to continue the Cal-Access Replacement System with $11.8 million General Fund and to continue the Notary Automation Program Replacement Project with $9.75 million from the Business Fees Fund. Members asked about total project costs, testing, data migration, and the expected November 2026 go-live date for Cal-Access replacement. Votes were taken on the vote-only items once quorum was established, and the committee approved the items considered. The final informational item was an overview from the California Arts Council, which highlighted the agency’s 50th anniversary, its statewide grantmaking, and the economic impact of arts funding. Council staff described Creative Corps, cultural districts, and the role of arts funding in local economies, while members and public witnesses urged increased support, including a request to raise local assistance grant funding to $50 million and to provide additional funding for cultural districts. Testimony emphasized the arts as economic infrastructure, community infrastructure, and a source of civic and cultural vitality across California.

Transcript Highlights:

• Welcome to the fiscal year 27 capital budget writing session.
• Section 93, grants and allocations. This shows the updated amounts for CTF.
• Section 88 for tax stitches says of the funding allocated, 1.4...
• And section 88 for tax stitches says of the funding allocated, 1.4. Funds.
• And an additional $50,000 is allocated to be funded from eligible federal funds.

Summary: The committee met for a fiscal year 2027 capital budget writing session with all 12 members present. It first reviewed and approved the DNREC Resource Conservation and Development drainage project list, which would add projects across New Castle, Kent, and Sussex counties and bring the total eligible projects to 1,561. Members offered personal remarks thanking retiring conservation district staff, especially Kevin Donnelly, for years of work on drainage and water issues. The committee then reviewed DelDOT Rule 12 changes, including annual date updates and a reduction in the inflation markup applied to older estimates, and approved the rule as amended. The committee next adopted DelDOT Appendix A and the FY27 paving and rehabilitation list, including the subdivision street management fund and various road resurfacing projects. DelDOT explained that paving projects are for state-of-good-repair work and that major changes from corridor studies would be handled separately. The committee also approved DelDOT epilogue changes, including updates to authorization amounts, a $25 million increase for toll infrastructure work, changes to subdivision street paving language, and an increase in the subdivision street paving management fund to $30 million. Several sections were placed on hold for later updates. The committee then moved through boilerplate epilogue sections in the bond bill, approving a wide range of provisions affecting conservation districts, housing, economic development, corrections, DNREC, public safety, transportation, agriculture, fire prevention, education, and other agencies. Many sections were adopted in groups, while some were held for later revisions or deleted as no longer needed. The session included updates to school capital rules, transportation restrictions and reporting requirements, DNREC conservation and land-use provisions, and funding and administrative authorities across multiple agencies. The committee broke for lunch after approving the education-related sections through 147, with additional sections still pending.

Transcript Highlights:

• We did not receive an allocation carve out last year for New Mexico grown.
• Or allocating those funds, which I would assume that they would have the budget authority, broad budget
• authority to allocate funds as needed, but specifically I'm not aware.
• That was recently allocated, the $2 million was recently allocated, and it's for the use of this school
• in New Mexico and the budgets that the LESC is presenting.

Transcript Highlights:

• You all budget based on actuals.
• Due to the budget deficit, it was not included in the budget.
• The CCS budget allocations are intended to reflect the counties' historical expenditures and caseload
• The CCS budget allocations are intended to reflect the county's historical expenditures and caseload.
• county allocation methodology.

Summary: The committee heard a budget oversight hearing on the Department of Health Care Services, focusing first on the overall Medi-Cal budget and a March General Fund loan to cover a current-year shortfall. DHCS said the 2025-26 budget proposal totals $193.4 billion, with Medi-Cal projected at $188.1 billion total funds and $42.1 billion General Fund, driven by higher enrollment, pharmacy costs, managed care growth, and costs tied to eligibility expansions and the COVID-era redetermination unwinding. The department said the $3.44 billion loan was needed to manage cash flow and ensure timely payments to providers and plans, while the LAO noted Medi-Cal’s cash-basis budgeting creates volatility and that more detailed estimates would come with the May Revision. Members discussed federal Medicaid threats, the need for transparency on cost drivers, and the impact of pharmacy spending, long-term care, and immigration-related coverage expansions. The second major topic was family health programs, including California Children’s Services, the continuous coverage unwinding, and opioid settlement fund spending. DHCS described CCS funding methodology changes, ongoing county stakeholder work, and a delayed rollout of CCS monitoring and oversight until July 1, 2025, while county representatives and advocates argued the program is underfunded and asked for more technical assistance and a delay in implementation. On the unwinding, the department explained that federal redetermination flexibilities helped maintain coverage after the pandemic, but the Governor’s budget proposes ending them at the end of June 2025; advocates urged making the flexibilities permanent to avoid coverage losses. For opioid settlement funds, DHCS and Finance said the budget increases funding for naloxone distribution while reducing other harm-reduction spending based on updated settlement revenues, prompting criticism from members and public commenters who argued the change would weaken effective harm-reduction programs. The hearing also included an update on Proposition 35 implementation. DHCS said the voter-approved measure continuously appropriates MCO tax revenues beginning in 2025, with up to $4.6 billion annually available for specified Medi-Cal and provider investments in 2025 and 2026, but implementation depends on consultation with the required stakeholder advisory committee. The department and LAO noted uncertainty about future federal rules affecting the MCO tax after 2026. Public testimony largely supported maintaining Medi-Cal expansions, protecting immigrant coverage, preserving harm-reduction funding, and increasing support for community health workers, pediatric dental care, and CCS county administration. No votes were taken during the portion of the hearing provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• For that reason, I simply ask that when you devise the 2026 to 2028 biennial budget, the last budget
• For that reason, I simply ask that when you devise the 2026 to 2028 biennial budget, the last budget
• For that reason, I simply ask that when you devise the 2026 to 2028 biennial budget, the last budget
• With the money allocated in last session's budget to address child exploitation, the AG's Department
• allocated in last session's<00:35:00.040> budget<00:35:00.359> to<00:35:00.920> address

Keywords: Meeting Start 00:00:00 Attendance Roll Call 00:00:19 Auditor of Public Accounts 00:01:07 Office of Secretary of State 00:10:22 Kentucky State Treasury 00:17:51 Office of Attorney General 00:28:50, 958, all

Summary: The Budget Review Subcommittee on General Government met for its first meeting and heard budget-related presentations from the Auditor of Public Accounts and the Secretary of State, with the Treasurer beginning a presentation at the end of the transcript. Auditor Allison Ball reviewed her office’s 2024 and early 2025 work, including hundreds of county and state audits, several special examinations, and ongoing reviews such as the kinship care funding issue, the Kentucky Department of Education audit, and the Jefferson County Public Schools audit. She said her office is focused on waste, fraud, abuse, and legal compliance, and asked the committee to consider future budget changes, including aligning her appropriation with restricted funding and restoring a stronger performance-audit function. She also highlighted audits that exposed serious problems, including the Department of Juvenile Justice review, and said those reports are intended to serve as models for other entities to avoid similar failures. Secretary of State Michael Adams said his office is self-sustaining through fees and does not need tax dollars, but asked for greater access to its own revenues and more flexibility in using them. He highlighted the Safe at Home address confidentiality program, saying recent changes expanded protections for survivors of domestic violence, sexual assault, and human trafficking, and that the program has grown rapidly while remaining funded by offender fines. Adams also urged lawmakers to again adjust county election funding for inflation, noting the current per-voter and per-precinct amounts were set decades ago. In questioning, Representative Hart asked whether the Safe at Home program was self-funding; Adams replied that it covers only about 10% of its operating cost and said the best solution would be to let the office use more of the revenue it already collects rather than rely on tax dollars. Treasurer Martin Medcafe, introduced with staff member Russell Weber, praised the General Assembly’s fiscal discipline and described the Treasury’s work in managing state funds. He reported strong results from the Unclaimed Property Fund, saying the office returned $35.5 million to Kentuckians in its first year and $3.8 million in the first month of the current year, and said the State Investments Commission generated $682 million in returns last year. He also highlighted financial literacy efforts through the Kentucky Financial Empowerment Commission and said the Treasury is helping manage opioid settlement funds, which are now earning up to $200,000 per month through investment. No votes or formal actions were taken in the portion of the meeting provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• Chair, this is just a critical conversation for this budget year.
• Also thankful for the Governor's budget, which places a placeholder in the budget at $5 million, but
• a placeholder in the budget at 5 places a placeholder in the budget at 5 million<00:03:38.640> but
• We also know that budgets are a moral document of what one values.
• These types of grants, but 2% can make a big difference in budgets.

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• > and<00:05:18.160> bianual<00:05:18.639> budget capital plan and bianual budget
• capital plan and bianual budget requests.
• in or the upcoming budget cycle.
• /c><00:22:16.080> funds<00:22:16.640> to we have allocated the funds to we have allocated
• <00:28:56.159> to funding received that is allocated to funding received that is allocated

Keywords: 00:02 EEC – State-Owned Dams 21:07 EEC – Grid Resilience Grant Funds 37:24 Adjournment, 958, all

Summary: The committee heard presentations from the Department for Environmental Protection and the Office of Energy Policy on Kentucky’s state-owned dam repair program and the electric grid resilience program. Commissioner Tony Hatton explained how state dams are defined and classified under Kentucky law, the criteria used to prioritize repairs or decommissioning, and the status of several projects funded in the last biennium. He said the department is using a design-bid-build process, with major work planned or underway at Willisburg Lake, Big Bone Lick State Park Dam, Clemens Lake Dam, Marion County Sportsman’s Dam, Chinoa Lake Creek/Canning Creek Dam, and Lake Malone, and that $0.5 million is reserved for routine repairs. He also described the timeline and cost pressures, noting that construction seasons and bid uncertainty can affect schedules and estimates. Members asked several questions about whether the estimates were current, how accurate the bids tend to be, why the process takes so long, and whether it would be better to fund design separately before construction. Hatton said the estimates are the best current engineering estimates, that costs often stay within about 10% but can vary, and that the overall process is usually closer to two years than four, though delays can occur. He also said all of the allocated dam funds must be available before bids can be let. The committee discussed whether design work can become stale if construction is delayed. Kenya Stump then updated the committee on Kentucky’s electric grid resilience program under federal Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act funding. She said Kentucky has received years one through three of the five-year program and has allocated funds to state park electric systems and municipal utilities, with years four and five not yet received. She identified Ken Lake State Park and Kentucky Dam Village as the two state park projects in progress, and Owensboro, Princeton, Williamstown, and Hopkinsville as the municipal projects selected through a competitive process. She said the projects are under contract or in final negotiations, with municipal construction expected to begin in the first quarter of 2026 and finish by the end of 2026, and explained that the work includes line, pole, transformer, meter, and outage-management upgrades. Members asked about the relationship between this program and prior park appropriations, the timing of agreements with Parks, and whether the park systems could eventually be transferred to the local electric cooperative; Stump said the park agreements are imminent and that the upgrades are intended to bring the systems up to code so the cooperative can maintain them. No votes were taken, and the chair adjourned the committee until the following Wednesday, with a possible time change to avoid a scheduling conflict.

Transcript Highlights:

• BUDGET.
• THE BASE BUDGET SERVES AS THE INCREMENTAL BUDGETING APPROACH.
• OVERALL THE HHS BUDGET ACCOUNTS FOR APPROXIMATELY 50 PERCENT OF THE STATE'S TOTAL BASE BUDGET FOR FISCAL
• OF THE TOTAL STATE BASE BUDGET.
• BY FUND TYPE FOR EACH BUDGET ENTITY.

Keywords: 999, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• that budget request. move forward.
• I'm here to implore the human services body of the state of California to implement a budget allocation
• items. past by previous legislative budget items.
• I would just want to support the line item on the 2025 budget to allocate cash payments for seniors who
• In addition, in 2024, there was an item on the California budget to allocate cash payments for seniors

Keywords: 988, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Good morning, Jessica Moore, DFA budget.
• She's leading up the budget team at DFA.
• You mean they're spending $14 million and it's not in the budget? It would be in their budget, yes.
• Bluff are different budgets.
• that you... ...budget request.

Summary: The committee first adopted revised JBC rules, which staff said were updated to reflect legislation passed in the 2025 session. It then heard a presentation from DFA Secretary Jim Hudson on the governor’s proposed balanced budget for FY27, with no action taken. Hudson said the budget reflects three priorities: limiting state-government growth, continuing investments in education, and advancing income-tax cuts. He highlighted increases for education funding through EFAs, pay-plan costs for Corrections, DPS, and the Attorney General, higher education productivity funding, drug task forces, a Corrections medical contract, the governor’s 1033 initiative, SNAP error-rate reduction efforts, and an additional $100 million set aside for Medicaid sustainability. Committee members questioned the size of the tax cuts, the balance requirement, public education funding, Medicaid trust-fund levels, EFA funding, and the expected impact of new SNAP cost-sharing rules. The Division of Higher Education then presented its productivity-based funding recommendations. Officials said institutions were 2.61% more productive overall, with funding changes driven by a statutory formula that rewards degree production, underserved populations, and high-demand fields. Members asked about declines at UA Little Rock, the formula’s multipliers, the role of the Arkansas Access Act and a new return-on-investment metric, and how two-year colleges are adjusted for size. The committee also reviewed special items and approved two letters: one authorizing 17 net personnel changes across nine institutions, and another adding special language for North Arkansas College’s entry into the University of Arkansas system. The committee then adopted the Higher Education Coordinating Board’s recommendations for all institutions. A lengthy portion of the meeting focused on the University of Arkansas system, especially Fayetteville’s athletics funding and the broader impact of the House/NIL settlement. Chancellor Charles Robinson and system officials explained that the board had waived a longstanding campus transfer and directed the university to provide an additional $6 million to athletics, with some costs likely to be passed through to students but partially offset by existing budget growth. Members debated whether the university should prioritize academics or athletics, how the transfer originated, and whether the athletic changes would affect affordability. The committee also discussed the 1890 extension program at UAPB and the Division of Agriculture’s land-grant funding. UAPB officials said the state match is intended to be one-to-one, that the current recommendation aligns appropriation with actual spending, and that a $2 million set-aside remains available if needed. The Division of Agriculture later clarified that its Smith-Lever extension and Hatch research funds are part of the UA system’s separate budget and that the state matched about $6.2 million in federal extension funding last year. The committee then moved to the Department of Corrections. It approved G1, transferring 51 positions to the secretary’s office to activate a recidivism program, with an estimated cost of about $4 million. Staff then began walking through the department’s FY27 budget, noting an increase of about $8 million for administration and shared services, including a $170,000 sex-offender assessment appropriation moved under Act 723 of 2025 and roughly $6 million more for medical contracts. Questions on the Corrections budget had just begun when the transcript ended.

Transcript Highlights:

• So one thing that has not changed is the allocation methodology.
• However, the board decided not to allocate any funds based on this new model.
• They will still use the current model to allocate 2026-27 funding.
• Funds will be allocated again on the current model. But this will allow...
• Funds will be allocated again on the current model.

Summary: The Appropriations Committee on Higher Education met to hear two presentations focused on the state university system: an update from the Board of Governors on performance-based funding and a state university efficiency study from Ben Watkins of the Division of Bond Finance. Chair Harrell emphasized accountability, maintaining Florida’s top-ranked higher education system, and getting the best return on state investment. A quorum was present, with several senators excused and one arriving later in the meeting. Sarah Donaghi outlined changes to the performance-based funding model. She said the current model will be used for 2026-27 funding, with only minor benchmark changes for metrics tied to programs of strategic emphasis, reflecting a statutory review that reduced the list of designated programs from about 800 to about 200. She also described a new “PBF 2.0” framework approved by the Board of Governors for implementation in 2027-28 funding, which will combine excellence and improvement measures, update benchmarks to the SUS 2030 strategic plan, reduce “layups” where many schools score perfect tens, expand the affordability metric to include students without loans, remove SUS transfer students from certain graduation metrics, and create a new transfer-student outcome metric. The board will run the new model alongside the current one before using it for funding, and no funding changes will occur this year. Watkins presented findings from an eight-month efficiency study ordered by executive order. Using audited financial data, student outcome data, and personnel data, he concluded that Florida’s universities provide strong value because of low tuition, rising degree production, and improved job placement and earnings outcomes. He said tuition remains the lowest in the country and that state support has increased, while per-student spending has also risen, driven largely by payroll costs. He argued that universities should operate more like business enterprises, with more granular budgeting, clearer financial reporting, and efficiency metrics such as operating expense per student and cost per degree, and he recommended that such measures be incorporated into performance funding and board oversight. Committee members asked about national comparisons, data transparency, payroll growth, admissions selectivity, and whether legislation should require more detailed institutional reporting. The meeting ended with no public comment and adjournment after Senator Bracey Davis moved to adjourn.

Transcript Highlights:

• This is the Assembly Budget Subcommittee on Human Services issues.
• What is your budget ask for to make up for this discrepancy?
• It has a $2 million accompanying budget request.
• I just want to support the line item on the 2025 budget to allocate cash payments for seniors who were
• In addition, in 2024, there was an item on the California budget to allocate cash payments for seniors

Summary: The Assembly Budget Subcommittee on Human Services held an informational hearing on child welfare, foster care, child support, and related prevention efforts. The chair opened by emphasizing mandated reporting reform, foster care system improvements, and community-based prevention, and noted that no votes would be taken. Public testimony focused first on mandated reporting, where a lived-experience advocate and several organizations argued that the current system overreports families, especially Black, Native, and Latino families, causes trauma, and should be reformed through standardized training, clearer thresholds, and stronger community supports rather than more hotline referrals. Casey Family Programs cited data showing nearly 90% of reports are unsubstantiated, while CDSS said it is already forming a Mandated Reporting Advisory Committee, updating training, and exploring community pathways and possible changes to the list of mandated reporters. CWDA and SEIU supported training and alternative response concepts but stressed child safety, county capacity, funding, and the need for careful implementation and accountability. The committee then discussed a proposal to create a foster care multi-agency office within the California Health and Human Services Agency, led by a chief foster youth advocate with authority to coordinate across departments. Advocates said foster youth often need services from education, health, housing, and behavioral health systems that do not coordinate well, and argued that a central office with real authority could improve placement stability and access to services. CDSS responded that existing structures already provide coordination, including AB 2083 interagency teams, the Child Welfare Council, complex care steering committees, and the foster care ombudsperson, but said it was open to technical assistance. Members raised concerns about whether the new office would have enough authority and funding to avoid becoming another layer of bureaucracy, and the chair emphasized the need for real “teeth” and better interagency action. The final major topic was the continuation and expansion of Promise Neighborhoods. A community leader described strong early results from the state-funded neighborhoods, including improved kindergarten readiness, reduced chronic absenteeism, higher graduation rates, food access, housing supports, and mental health services, but warned that current funding sunsets in June 2025 and that a fiscal cliff could jeopardize staff and services. CDSS said the four funded neighborhoods have reported positive outcomes and valuable flexibility, but also noted challenges with one-time funding, student mental health, and long-term planning. Assemblymember Mia Bonta urged continued investment, saying the place-based model is difficult to rebuild once lost, and the chair asked LAO to help identify the minimum funding needed to preserve the existing infrastructure while evaluation results are still pending.

Transcript Highlights:

• However, this budget does the opposite.
• I think this is one of the areas of the budget where tough decisions, one of many areas of the budget
• They were in HCD's budget. What do you mean by where?
• In this item, we have three budget change proposals.
• state budget?

Summary: The Assembly Subcommittee on State Administration held a budget hearing focused heavily on housing, homelessness, and related administrative proposals. HCD reported that California housing production has increased, with 2023 completions up 13% from 2022 and entitlement and construction timelines improving, while members and advocates criticized the Governor’s January budget for zeroing out or sharply reducing several housing programs. Public testimony urged funding for affordable housing production, preservation, youth housing, CalHome, LIHTC, HAP, and related programs, and several speakers argued the state should not pull back after recent progress. A major policy item was trailer bill language to allow HCD to access “excess equity” in existing affordable housing projects and recycle those funds into new or preserved housing. HCD and the LAO said the proposal could unlock tens or hundreds of millions of dollars, but members wanted guardrails and clearer statutory direction to ensure the funds stay within the intended housing purposes. The committee also discussed encampment resolution funding; HCD said the proposal would shift expenditure deadlines to the date of award rather than appropriation, while the LAO raised concerns about limited outcome data and urged the Legislature to use upcoming reporting before deciding on future funding. The hearing also covered HCD trailer bills to consolidate default reserve funds into a centralized continuously appropriated account and to clarify reporting requirements for early rounds of the Homeless Housing, Assistance and Prevention program. HCD requested funding to implement chaptered legislation, including a new tribal housing program and reporting-related bills, and also sought extensions for certain reappropriations, including Homekey and REAP 2 deadlines. Public commenters and regional agencies supported flexibility for REAP 2 timing and other housing-related adjustments. Finally, the Business, Consumer Services and Housing Agency presented the Governor’s reorganization proposal to split the current agency into a Housing and Homelessness Agency and a Consumer Protection Agency. The administration said the change would improve focus, efficiency, and coordination, but the LAO and several members questioned whether it would truly save money or improve accountability, especially given the need for new leadership, possible staffing changes, and the fact that the plan had not yet been formally submitted for review. No votes were taken during the hearing.

Transcript Highlights:

• When taken together with surtax appropriations in the fiscal year 2026 budget, our House 1 budget, we
• I see that there's no funding for the rural aid in the H-1 budget or in the supplemental budget.
• versus the operating budget.
• revenue spend in the budget.
• Operating budget, which includes a fair share consensus revenue spend in the budget of 1.95.

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The hearing focused on House Bill 55, the governor’s FY25 supplemental budget proposal to spend about $1.3 billion in surplus Fair Share revenue. House and Senate chairs framed the bill as a one-time opportunity to invest fairly in education and transportation, while also noting the need to protect the state’s long-term fiscal balance. Administration officials said the proposal should be considered alongside the FY26 budget and related bills, since the governor’s broader Fair Share plan aims for roughly an even split between education and transportation over time. Secretary of Administration and Finance Matthew Gorzkowicz, Transportation Secretary Monica Tibbits-Nutt, and Education Secretary Patrick Tutwiler outlined the administration’s priorities. Transportation funding would go mainly to the MBTA and related reserves, including money for the Federal Transit Administration reserve, MBTA stabilization reserve, low-income fares, winter resilience, RTA workforce support, MassDOT workforce and project delivery, and micro-transit grants. Education funding would support universal preschool expansion, early education and care capacity, early literacy tutoring, adult basic education and ESOL, early college and career technical education, MyCAP expansion, and special education circuit breaker funding. The administration emphasized that many of these investments are one-time or multi-year measures designed to address current needs without creating unsustainable recurring costs. Committee members raised concerns about regional equity, especially the large share of transportation money going to the MBTA versus regional transit authorities and rural areas. Several members asked for more detail on how the proposal would benefit Western Massachusetts and other non-MBTA regions, and whether micro-transit and Chapter 90-related investments would be sufficient. Education questions focused on special education reimbursement shortfalls, federal funding cuts to school districts, and how CTE and vocational investments would align students with workforce needs. The administration said it would provide additional data on MBTA versus RTA investment and explained that the special education circuit breaker and transportation reimbursement changes were intended to improve predictability and relief for districts. After the administration panel, Jessica Tang of AFT Massachusetts testified in support of using Fair Share funds to protect public education amid federal uncertainty and cuts. She argued that schools are facing a fiscal cliff, that vulnerable students would be hit hardest by funding losses, and that the Fair Share revenue should be used to preserve services and support students’ needs.