Transcript Highlights:

• The analysis of this bill acknowledges this risk, and here is how that risk plays out in real school
• I accept the committee analysis committee amendments as noted on pages 10 and 11 of the analysis.
• I know this is an issue that our Chair of the Budget Subcommittee has focused on.
• Certainly you understand the analysis and the history there.
• Again, as the committee analysis points out— Again, as the committee analysis points out, students with

Summary: The Assembly Education Committee heard a lengthy agenda of education-related bills, with quorum established at the start and several measures taken up on consent or special order. The committee also announced that AB 1644, AB 2362, and later AB 2197 were pulled from the hearing. Members reminded the public of hearing rules and limited testimony to two witnesses each in support and opposition. AB 2651, by Assemblymember Bonta, would require schools to notify parents when school vaccination rates fall below herd-immunity thresholds. Supporters, including physicians, the California State PTA, public health groups, and school employee organizations, argued that families need timely, school-specific information to protect children and vulnerable community members. Opponents raised concerns about privacy, stigma, and whether school-level snapshots could be misleading. The bill passed the committee 5-1 and later 7-1 on the roll call. AB 2509, by Assemblymember Schultz, would allow districts to use a five-year rolling average for ADA funding calculations; supporters said it would stabilize funding amid attendance declines, while one member noted concerns about masking long-term enrollment problems. It passed 5-1 and later 7-2. The committee also approved AB 2430, which would expand after-school access, especially for high school students, improve funding and transparency, and create a work group on program quality. Testimony emphasized the value of expanded learning for youth development and working families, and members discussed the need to address middle school access as well. AB 2526, focused on special education funding, would expand the low-incidence fund to include students qualifying for the California alternate assessment; supporters said it would better align funding with student need, while some concerns remained about over-identification. AB 2325, the Pathways to Bilingual Teaching Act, would create a grant program to build bilingual teacher pipelines through partnerships among schools, community colleges, and universities; it received strong support and passed unanimously. AB 2460, presented by Assemblymember Pellerin for Assemblymember Celeste Rodriguez, would update school mental-health referral protocols to address trauma related to immigration enforcement; it also passed unanimously. AB 2404, which sought to require Central Valley representation on several governor-appointed bodies, drew debate over geographic representation and board composition and ultimately failed on a 2-5 vote.

Transcript Highlights:

• I'm Anna Mingi, State Budget Director with Minnesota Management and Budget.
• the budget. the budget.
• . budget. budget.
• impacts their budget? impacts their budget?
• It's 1% of the budget. "Oh, no big deal. It's 1% of the budget.

Keywords: 918, senate, all

Summary: The Senate Rules and Administration Select Subcommittee on Federal Impacts on Minnesotans and Economic Stability met on February 20, 2026, to hear from Minnesota Management and Budget State Budget Director Anna Mingi about federal funding changes affecting the state budget. Before testimony began, Senator Rasmusson objected to a draft committee report that had been prepared in advance of the hearing, arguing it was inappropriate to summarize testimony before it occurred. The chair responded that nonpartisan staff had prepared the draft from Mingi’s submitted presentation and could revise it after the hearing if needed. Director Mingi explained that federal dollars make up more than one-third of state spending and support about 650 federal awards totaling over $23 billion this year, with more than $15 billion supporting state entitlement programs. She said the federal funding environment had changed significantly since January 2025 through executive orders, pauses, terminations, new grant conditions, delayed awards, and the July 2025 passage of H.R. 1, the federal reconciliation bill. Her main focus was H.R. 1’s effects on health care and food assistance, including work requirements for some adults, changes to eligibility for legal non-citizens, limits on retroactive Medicaid coverage and directed payments, new limits on provider taxes, and SNAP changes that shift some benefit and administrative costs to the state and counties. She estimated H.R. 1 would reduce federal funds to state-administered programs by about $327 million in the current biennium and $1.6 billion in the next, with additional costs to hospitals, counties, and other partners beyond the budget horizon. Members asked follow-up questions about whether the estimates were relative to the forecast and whether federal Medicaid funding would still rise over time. Mingi said the estimates were based on the November forecast baseline and that Medicaid federal dollars would likely continue growing overall, though the law still creates significant losses relative to prior projections. Senator Rasmusson emphasized that point in remarks to the committee. The discussion then shifted to federal grant pauses and cancellations: MMB’s tracker showed about six awards on hold totaling roughly $491 million, 13 confirmed cancellations across areas including clean energy, education, food assistance, and public health, and additional threatened or litigated cuts not included in those totals. Mingi identified two canceled violence-prevention-related grants, including a FEMA public safety grant and a justice reinvestment grant, and noted that CDC had recently moved to cancel or seek cancellation of several Minnesota public health grants, including a $65 million public health infrastructure award.

Transcript Highlights:

• Some are doing cost versus revenue analysis.
• This is not the budgeting process.
• We're not creating a brand new model, but that was the analysis.
• And we had that in the budget at one point last session.
• Before budget, I think there's some couple meetings before and after that as well, the budget section

Summary: The Higher Ed Funding Committee met to review how North Dakota might identify and address low-producing academic programs and to discuss draft funding formulas for the university system. Lisa Johnson of the NDUS explained that the State Board of Higher Education is already developing a system-wide policy, using models from other states such as Texas, Virginia, North Carolina, Colorado, Kentucky, Ohio, and Connecticut. She described how low-producing programs are typically flagged by multi-year enrollment or completion thresholds, then reviewed for workforce demand, mission fit, cost, accreditation, and regional need before any action is taken. Committee members asked about what counts as a program, how costs are analyzed, whether certificates are included, how exemptions work for mission-critical or high-demand fields, and whether the board or legislature should set the rules. Johnson said the board is the appropriate body to lead the process, but legislators could use funding leverage if they wanted to encourage action; the chair asked the board to bring a detailed proposal to the June meeting. The committee then heard a Legislative Council presentation on a draft formula for UND and NDSU. The proposal uses fall census FTE enrollment, with a placeholder undergraduate rate of $7,000 per FTE and a graduate/professional rate of $10,500, plus incentives for completions in in-demand fields and research productivity. Alex from Legislative Council walked through the projected funding effects, noting that the model would increase funding for NDSU and reduce it for UND in the current biennium, with different results in the next biennium as enrollment changes are recognized. Members questioned the use of the placeholder rates, the definition of in-demand programs, the treatment of research funding, and the exclusion of state-appropriated dollars from the external grants calculation. The chair emphasized that the numbers were illustrative and that appropriators would set the actual dollar amounts later. A second draft formula for the other nine institutions was also reviewed. That model uses fall census FTE without a weighted economic factor, applies a higher undergraduate rate, and adds completion incentives for in-demand credentials and all other completions. Members noted that the formula would benefit some institutions, such as Bismarck State College, while reducing funding for others, such as Mayville State, and discussed whether the nine institutions should be treated more uniformly or split into smaller groups because of their different missions and sizes. Committee members and staff repeatedly stressed that the formulas are still being refined and that some institutions would likely need hold-harmless adjustments or other transition measures. The meeting ended with the chair directing the committee to continue the discussion later and to expect further work on both the low-producing program policy and the funding formulas.

Transcript Highlights:

• And I want to commend the analysis that was done by the committee, and I'd like to read from the analysis
• I know that was mentioned in the analysis.
• changes related to the Governor's budget.
• Page 21 of the analysis. Thank you. So on page 21 of the analysis, there is bullet number two.
• Where we believe that analysis... ...following the SPI governance shift, where we believe that analysis

Summary: The committee heard several education-related bills, with the most extensive discussion focused on AB 2189, AB 2615, AB 2496, AB 1750, and AB 1644. AB 2189 would create an $800,000 grant program through the State Council on Developmental Disabilities to support a statewide parent network for special education advocacy and training. Supporters said families need stronger coordination and information to navigate special education, while an opponent argued the bill could duplicate existing family-led organizations. The bill passed 6-0 and was sent to Appropriations, held on call for add-on votes. AB 2615, a cleanup bill to AB 715 on antisemitism and instructional materials, drew the most controversy. The authors said it was intended to clarify prior commitments by removing references to professional responsibility standards, refining the “factually accurate” language, and clarifying how discriminatory materials are handled. Supporters said it would help protect students from discrimination, while many educators, civil rights groups, and other organizations opposed it unless amended, warning that the factual-accuracy language could chill teaching and be applied too broadly. The committee chair and members raised concerns about implementation but ultimately supported moving the bill forward; it passed 5-0 and was held on call. AB 2496 would streamline school accountability reporting by making the California School Dashboard the primary transparency tool, phasing out the School Accountability Report Card over time, and making mid-year LCAP reporting optional. Supporters said this would reduce duplication and administrative burden while preserving access to key data; opponents worried families could lose the simplicity and accessibility of the current SARC and that the mid-year update still serves an important purpose. The bill was approved 3-0 and held on call. AB 1750, which would extend full salary for an additional five months for school employees who exhaust sick leave due to illness or injury, was supported as a dignity and retention measure but opposed by administrators over staffing and cost concerns; it passed 4-0 and was held on call. AB 1644 would require a bell-to-bell smartphone ban in TK-8 and recommend it for high school, with exceptions for instructional and safety needs; supporters said phones are harming attention and learning, while opponents argued districts had just adopted local policies and needed more flexibility. The transcript ends during discussion of that bill.

Transcript Highlights:

• Your partnership is critical to our budget process.
• CDCR is over budgeted by a few million dollars in the budget year.
• An analysis of CDCR's budget was performed where the $2 billion in increases related to bargain agreements
• these ongoing reductions to CDCR's operating budget.
• While proportionally, it may be a smaller bit of the budget, I mean, the budget has, it has grown significantly

Keywords: 988, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• And I want to commend the analysis that was done by the committee, and I'd like to read from the analysis
• I know that was mentioned in the analysis.
• I'd like to thank the committee staff for their analysis.
• changes related to the Governor's budget.
• So on page 21 of the analysis, there is bullet number two.

Keywords: 988, house, all

Summary: The Assembly Education Committee heard a lengthy set of bills, beginning with AB 2189, which would authorize a State Council on Developmental Disabilities grant to create a statewide parent network for families of students with disabilities. The author and supporters said the bill would help parents understand special education rights and advocate more effectively, while an opposing witness argued California already has family-led organizations doing similar work and the bill should build on existing efforts. The committee discussed the bill’s amendments, then passed AB 2189 6-0 and held it on call. The committee then took up AB 2615, a cleanup bill to AB 715 dealing with instructional materials and anti-discrimination provisions in schools. Supporters said the bill makes technical and substantive fixes promised during last year’s debate, including clarifying “factually accurate” language, removing references to professional responsibility standards, and refining how offending materials are handled. Opponents from civil rights, labor, and education groups argued the bill still chills speech and could be used to police classroom instruction too broadly, especially the “factually accurate” requirement. After extended debate and several member questions about implementation, the committee passed AB 2615 5-0 and held it on call. The committee also heard AB 2496, which would streamline school accountability reporting by making the California School Dashboard the primary transparency tool, reviewing or phasing out the School Accountability Report Card, and making a mid-year LCAP update optional. Supporters said the bill reduces duplication and improves accessibility, while an opponent warned that parents could lose a simple PDF-style report and that the mid-year update still provides useful budget information. AB 2496 was passed out on a 3-0 vote and held on call. In addition, AB 1750, which would require school employees to receive full salary for up to five additional months while on extended medical leave, drew strong support from educators and opposition from administrators over staffing and cost concerns; it passed 4-0 and was held on call. The committee also heard AB 1644, a bell-to-bell smartphone ban for TK-8 schools with recommended high school restrictions and exceptions for educational, health, and safety needs; supporters emphasized student focus and well-being, while administrators raised concerns about timing and local implementation after recent district policy adoption.

Transcript Highlights:

• Is this going to be budget neutral?
• Is this going to be budget neutral?
• But it will be... ...budget neutral.
• So we're not—this is not a budget buster.
• We'll be voting on the budget, and as chair of the education budget subcommittee in the Senate, one of

Summary: The committee heard several higher education bills. It first approved the consent calendar, which included SB 67 and SB 619. The main discussion centered on SB 437, which would direct the CSU system to develop a fair, evidence-based process for verifying whether someone is a descendant of a person enslaved in the United States, as part of the state’s reparations work. Supporters said the bill fills a gap left by the Reparations Task Force and would create a transparent, credible lineage-verification process; opponents argued genealogy methods already exist, the bill would waste money and delay action, and some raised constitutional concerns. The committee took a vote on SB 437, but the roll was left open after the initial tally showed three ayes and three noes. The committee then heard SB 790, which would allow California to join the interstate reciprocity agreement for online postsecondary education. The author and supporters said the bill would improve consumer protections for California students taking out-of-state online courses and help California institutions compete more effectively by reducing the burden of seeking separate state approvals. Opponents, including University of Phoenix and other groups, argued the bill conflicted with the existing reciprocity framework, could exclude some institutions, and might not actually secure California’s entry into the agreement. The committee voted 3-1 to pass SB 790 as amended to the Business and Professions Committee, with the roll left open. The committee also heard SB 391, which would authorize the Community College Chancellor’s Office to charge fees for research partners seeking access to data. Supporters said the office is absorbing significant unfunded workload from data requests and that fees would help recover costs; opponents, including the California Teachers Association community college association, warned the fees could create barriers for faculty and smaller researchers. Members discussed possible exemptions and implementation details. The committee voted 5-1 to pass SB 391 as amended to the Appropriations Committee, with the roll left open. Finally, the committee heard SB 685, a pilot program to provide cost-of-attendance assistance at four CSU campuses for students who experienced homelessness in high school. Supporters said it would help students cover housing, food, and transportation costs and reduce dropout risk; members asked about eligibility and implementation, and the author explained the bill would use McKinney-Vento homelessness designations and target students at risk of “summer melt” and college homelessness.

Transcript Highlights:

• Given that this is budget testimony, a lot of Well, given that this is budget testimony, a lot of what
• And the governor's budget for FY26 proposed DMH's budget at about $1.275 billion, almost $1.3 billion
• This is actually the largest budget we've ever seen. That's a 7% increase over last year's budget.
• In addition to DMH's budget, the governor's budget, the governor's budget, In addition to DMH's budget
• And is there money in your new budget to keep Pocasset open in the next budget?

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The committee heard budget testimony from Department of Mental Health Commissioner Brooke Doyle, who said DMH serves about 29,000 people and is facing rising demand, higher operating costs, and uncertainty about federal funding. She explained that the FY26 budget prioritizes fully funding the state-operated inpatient system, which is at 100% occupancy and often serves people transferred from Bridgewater State Hospital, while making reductions in other areas to balance the budget. Those reductions include a 50% cut to case managers, a pause on closing the Pocasset unit pending a working group on Cape access, and changes to youth and contracted services such as right-sizing IRTP and CIRT, reducing Youth PACT from seven teams to three, scaling back flex and jail diversion grants as ARPA funds wind down, and preserving the behavioral health helpline and community-based crisis services. Members from Western Massachusetts and the Cape raised concerns about access, staffing, and the impact of cuts, and Doyle said the department would continue operating IRTP services, improve the referral process, and work with stakeholders on the Pocasset review and other access issues. The committee also discussed school-based mental health, 988, loan forgiveness for workforce recruitment, and the role of co-response programs for law enforcement. Secretary Robin Lipson then testified for the Executive Office of Aging and Independence, describing a proposed FY26 budget increase of about 21% to support councils on aging, home care, elder abuse investigations, caregiver support, care transitions, and nutrition programs. She said the agency is managing rising demand, especially from the growing 80-plus population, and noted uncertainty around federal Older Americans Act funding after the federal disbursement agency was disbanded. To control costs, the office will manage intake and caseload growth in a fully state-funded home care program, but current clients will not lose services. Lipson also highlighted a new $1 million line item for local mini-grants to support age-friendly initiatives. In questions, members focused on elder scams, and Lipson said scams are increasing and the agency is working with banks, district attorneys, and public awareness campaigns. The Health Policy Commission’s Executive Director David Seltz presented the agency’s FY26 request and said the biggest challenge is health care affordability, with family premiums near $29,000 annually and many residents delaying care because of cost. He emphasized that recent legislation significantly expands HPC’s role through a new Office of Pharmaceutical Policy and Analysis, which will examine the drug supply chain and pricing, and a new Office of Health Resource Planning, which will support statewide planning around closures and access gaps. The new law also creates task forces on maternal health access and primary care, and adds transparency and oversight for private equity in health care. Members asked about pharmaceutical costs, GLP-1 weight-loss drugs, 340B, and maternal health closures; Seltz said the data show rapid growth in GLP-1 spending and that the new offices will help the state better understand cost drivers and access problems. The Center for Health Information and Analysis then began its testimony, describing its role as the state’s data hub for health care spending, utilization, quality, and affordability analysis.

Transcript Highlights:

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

Keywords: 987, senate, all

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

Transcript Highlights:

• So while comparable Medicaid budget.
• If I came here to talk about budget, I'm sure I'd have the budget numbers, but just didn't.
• Um, and how much of this budget goes toward the Medicaid fraud unit?
• our Medicaid fraud control units. recent budget for the AG's office?
• Um, and how much of this budget is >> Yep.

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• While we were working on the budget a year ago, we were making cuts to the HHS budget.
• . budgets. budgets.
• So, in some cases budget.
• analysis is very difficult. analysis is very difficult.
• order a uh economic analysis of a rule. order a uh economic analysis of a rule.

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• So what all went into that risk analysis and is at the appropriate level based on the risk analysis,
• So what all went into that risk analysis and is at the appropriate level based on the risk analysis,
• And if you're in the budget area, you know when you deal with those budgets for a significant number
• Counsel, you've got your analysis.
• We don't have any cost-benefit analysis.

Summary: The task force approved the March 25, 2026 minutes as amended, striking language about contracting with a security vendor. Members then reviewed a draft bill on concessions procurement (LC 27.0161), which would raise the competitive solicitation threshold from $25,000 to $50,000, allow requests for proposals in addition to bids, update language for vending and merchandising machines, and clarify where concession proceeds are deposited. OMB explained the bill and said it was open to further changes, including language to address artificial fragmentation, clarify which government entities are covered, and possibly set contract-length limits. Members raised questions about whether the bill would apply to school districts, park districts, airports, and other political subdivisions, and about whether concession agreements could direct proceeds to nonprofits or other secondary recipients; OMB said the statute is intended to require proceeds to go to the government entity’s operating fund or general fund. OMB also reported on other survey suggestions. It said a proposed general authority for agencies to create pre-qualified architect/engineering vendor pools would not move forward, because the existing authority is best limited to high-volume agencies. On legal notices, OMB said it had made progress with the North Dakota Newspaper Association on modernizing online notices, improving ADA compliance, and discussing rate and definition changes. On click-through agreements, OMB and the Attorney General’s office concluded no statutory change was needed after revising internal guidance; the $20,000 threshold was described as a practical cutoff for adhesive, nonnegotiable software terms. OMB also said issues raised by the Center for Distance Education on alternate procurements and food/beverage expenditures had been resolved through policy clarification. The University System gave a brief update on its collaboration with OMB and said it was continuing to review concessions, surplus property, and capital project statutes with all institutions involved. The task force then discussed a draft bill on requirements for new or expanded spending, intended to require agencies to identify program purpose, needs, alternatives, success measures, and budget details, and to report on outcomes over time. Members and staff debated whether OMB or Legislative Council should collect and report the information, how much should be real-time versus periodic, and whether the bill should include full implementation costs for pilot programs. Legislative Council staff said the new program evaluation division is still being built out, that staffing remains limited, and that the office plans to continue working with OMB and the executive branch to refine the proposal before the next meeting. No final action was taken on the draft bills beyond directing further work and follow-up for the next meeting.

Transcript Highlights:

• Is there an additional workload analysis that is kind of fee by fee?
• There is an additional workload analysis that outlines for all the application fees.
• So we did align all of the application fees with the workload analysis.
• The workload analysis for that full approval came to about $12,000. Our proposal...
• The workload analysis for that full approval came to about $12,000. Our proposal is 10.

Summary: The joint Sunset Review Oversight Hearing focused on the Bureau for Private Postsecondary Education (BPPE) and its reauthorization, operations, enforcement, fiscal condition, and student protections. Committee leaders and DCA officials praised the Bureau’s recent improvements in data systems, licensing, inspections, and enforcement, while noting the Bureau’s role has become more important as federal higher education oversight weakens. Bureau Chief Deborah Cochran said the agency has met its inspection mandate for the first time since the law was enacted, increased citations and disciplinary actions, reduced pending complaints, and used data tools to identify risk and monitor institutions more effectively. A major portion of the hearing centered on student harm, especially school closures, transcript access, predatory recruiting, and the Student Tuition Recovery Fund (STRF). Members asked how the Bureau protects students when schools close, whether bad actors can reopen under new entities, and whether enforcement tools are strong enough. Cochran said the Bureau can cite, fine, place schools on probation, revoke licenses, and order refunds, but it is seeking new authority to deny approval to operators who previously closed schools improperly or failed to refund students. She also said the Bureau is tracking ownership data and is concerned about institutions targeting immigrant and visa students. On STRF, Cochran explained that the fund is currently healthy, assessments are at zero because the balance is above the statutory target, and the Bureau paid about 1,100 claims totaling roughly $17 million over the last four years. Several members questioned the fairness of the assessment structure and discussed alternatives such as surety bonds, but the Bureau said STRF is working well and no change is needed at this time. Fee increases and the Bureau’s structural deficit were another major topic. Cochran said the Bureau reduced costs by eliminating positions, streamlining inspections, improving data analysis, and shifting some student-relief costs to STRF, but that legislative action is still needed to address the deficit. She said the proposed fees were based on workload analyses and that application fees generally match service costs, while annual fees are designed to cover most of the Bureau’s revenue needs. Some members and stakeholders criticized the proposed increases as too high, especially for out-of-state registration and campus fees, while others argued the Bureau needs sufficient resources to regulate effectively. Public commenters from private schools, Northeastern University, San Joaquin Valley College/Carrington College, and TICAS generally supported the Bureau’s mission and reauthorization, but urged changes such as risk-based oversight, better transcript protections, stronger limits on repeated provisional approvals, and more targeted fee and STRF reforms. No votes were taken, and the hearing ended with no formal action beyond discussion and receipt of testimony.

Transcript Highlights:

• And with $1.5 million appropriated in the state budget, we think the time is now. ...to meet this need
• It was allocated in the budget for a coordinating entity.
• This committee noted in the analysis that the range of duties assigned to the coordinating entity is
• The Assembly Committee on Education questioned in their own analysis whether the coordinating entity
• Comments in the Higher Education analysis showed valid concerns.

Summary: The Assembly Higher Education Committee met in a special hearing and took up SB 638 by Senator Padilla, a workforce development bill aimed at creating a coordinating entity called the Middle Class Pipeline Project. The bill would streamline interagency education and workforce programs, improve career technical education and career pathways, and direct resources toward high-unemployment, low-income regions through changes to the CTE incentive grant program. Supporters, including the Association of Independent California Colleges and Universities, the California Edge Coalition, National University, Long Beach City College, and United Ways of California, argued that California needs a statewide coordinating body to reduce silos, improve access to high-quality jobs, and better align education with labor market needs. Committee members focused heavily on whether the proposed entity would duplicate existing bodies such as the California Workforce Development Board and other education/workforce agencies, and whether its broad duties could be carried out with the $1.5 million budget allocation. The author said the bill is intended to move an operational coordinating entity into broader tri-party negotiations with legislative leadership and the Governor, and that the final structure and staffing would depend on those talks. Some members supported the concept but raised concerns about scope, duplication, and whether the bill should be delayed or audited; one member opposed it as too broad and underfunded. The committee ultimately voted to pass SB 638 to the Assembly Appropriations Committee on a courtesy vote. The roll call showed five ayes and three noes, with one member not voting, and the chair later allowed additional members to add on, including an additional aye from Assemblymember Haney. The hearing then adjourned with the chair noting that further conversations would continue on the coordinating entity and its responsibilities.

Transcript Highlights:

• bill analysis.
• Those are normally the sections in a bill analysis.
• is consistent, but conflicts with other parts of the bill analysis. the section-by-section analysis
• The bill analysis complies with the rules.
• They manage their their budgets for their cities.

Bills: SB5, SB11, SB12, SB9, SB42, SB15, SB5, SB11, SB12, SCR1

Keywords: hemp regulation, consumable products, cannabinoids, occupational licenses, criminal offenses, SB 11, Texas attorney general, election crimes, election law enforcement, criminal prosecution, Election Code, Government Code Chapter 402, local prosecutors, county attorney, district attorney, grand jury, probable cause reports, state election offenses, voter fraud, election integrity

Transcript Highlights:

• So, that's the budget side of it.
• So, that that's the budget side of it. So, that that's the budget side of it.
• That was, I think, a much simpler analysis for that program.
• I think a much simpler um analysis I think a much simpler um analysis for<00:08:16.800> for
• baking into the budget with this? baking into the budget with this?

Keywords: 916, all

Transcript Highlights:

• So the attempt now is to suspend the requirement of the economic analysis.
• This budget is one of the budgets that is entirely a special-funded agency.
• There are no general fund or SIF funds that go into this budget.
• We hope you support this budget as it is.
• and historic budget in this Kakawa room.

Keywords: 908, all

Summary: The Senate convened with prayer, pledge, roll call, and a quorum present, then approved a motion to lay over House Bill 1525 for one legislative day. It also voted not to concur with House amendments on Senate Bills 2294, 2297, 2070, 4017, and 2262, appointing conference committees for each. The chamber then took up a series of House bill amendments and final-passage votes. On amendments, the Senate adopted changes to House Bill 1229 on fleeing law enforcement and driving-record transparency after debate over insurance impacts and public safety; House Bill 1510 on teacher retention, on-site child care, and licensure study language; House Bill 1160 to restrict student personal electronic devices during instructional time; House Bill 1429 to address drone harassment and stalking of animals; House Bill 1203 to harmonize medical marijuana provisions; House Bill 1600 to create a UND immigration clinic with reporting requirements; House Bill 1130 to broaden K-12 funding formula changes and reduce state fiscal impact; House Bill 1279 to modify the coal conversion tax exemption; House Bill 1442 to adjust membership and scope of a state task force; and House Bill 1464 to convert a maternal care services proposal into a study and remove the appropriation. The Senate rejected an amendment to House Bill 1022 concerning the Retirement and Investment Office bonus program, then passed the bill. It also passed House Bill 1234 on a $90 million transfer to reduce PERS liability, while rejecting a floor amendment to it. On final passage, the Senate passed House Bills 1008 (Public Service Commission budget), 1218 (temporary moratorium and study on economic analysis for drain projects), 1234 (PERS funding transfer), 1146 (PERS defined contribution cleanup and emergency clause), 1355 (expanded notice for administrative rulemaking), 1470 (Game and Fish fee changes and guide/outfitter updates), 1029 (Capital Grounds Planning Commission duties), 1017 (Game and Fish budget), 1374 (township supervisor open-meeting exemption for on-site inspections), and 1064 (NC-SARA membership and distance education regulation). It defeated House Bill 1583 on false political advertisements with civil-action language and House Bill 1393 on earned wage access provider regulation. The transcript ends as the Senate begins consideration of House Bill 1326 on self-defense and unlawful firearm possession by felons.

Transcript Highlights:

• Just for the author, do you accept the technical amendments as laid out in the committee analysis?
• I've heard quite a lot about this as being the chair of Budget Sub 5.
• Actually, early budget action last year siphoned off $100 million of that money.
• One of the reasons the $100 million was taken from the budget, because that was under our budget committee
• Zabur, is a cost to our budget.

Summary: The Assembly Committee on Revenue and Taxation met as a subcommittee and heard several bills, with members explaining that measures with significant fiscal impacts would be held for suspense or taken up later. AB 761 would let the Monterey-Salinas Transit District place a local sales tax measure on the ballot with approval from two-thirds of its board rather than needing approval from each member jurisdiction; supporters said it would preserve transit funding for veterans, seniors, and people with disabilities, while an opponent argued it would make it easier to raise a regressive tax. The bill was voted out 5-2 after being called for absent members. AB 1253, which would clarify property tax treatment for wildfire reconstruction beyond substantial equivalence, drew support from the Los Angeles County Assessor and the California Assessors Association but was sent to suspense. AB 8, dealing with hemp enforcement, intoxicating hemp products, and integration of hemp cannabinoids into the cannabis supply chain and tax system, drew strong support from cannabis operators and labor groups and opposition from small cultivators and public health advocates concerned about supply, tax revenue, and voter intent; it was also sent to suspense. The committee then heard AB 1138, a major expansion and modernization of the film and television tax credit program. Supporters, including entertainment unions, workers, studios, and local officials, said the bill would help keep production and jobs in California amid competition from other states and countries; opponents criticized it as picking winners and losers and argued broader business costs were the real problem. The bill was referred to suspense. AB 829, which would create a California Parkinson’s Disease Research Fund and voluntary tax contribution program to support research and services, received unanimous support from advocates and was approved 6-0 to Appropriations. AB 474 would exempt rental income from nonprofit home-sharing programs for low-income homeowners from state income tax and protect participants’ eligibility for certain benefits; supporters said it could help older adults age in place and address housing shortages, and the bill was sent to suspense after members asked for clarification on the fiscal estimate. The committee also heard AB 376, which would exempt wildfire settlement payments from state income tax for certain disaster survivors; supporters from rural counties said the money is meant to help victims rebuild and should not be taxed, and the bill was referred to suspense. Finally, AB 480 would allow developers using low-income housing tax credits to switch from allocated to certificated state credits after an award, with supporters saying it would maximize private investment and stretch housing dollars further; it too was sent to suspense. Throughout the hearing, members repeatedly emphasized the need to balance policy goals with fiscal impacts, and several bills were held or referred to suspense rather than voted out immediately.

Transcript Highlights:

• There were solutions included in that budget.
• I think it's very challenging to make any diligent analysis on these kinds of budget cuts when we actually
• Please, I oppose and reject that budget cut.
• in accordance with the 2023 Budget Act.
• proposal that continues to be in the budget.

Keywords: 988, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• And I have to tell you, industry agreed with this analysis.
• On time and under budget.
• But this is a world of analysis that predates us in many ways.
• But this is a world of analysis that predates us in many ways.
• That's compiled into an analysis report, which feeds into the CEC's process, and then we take That analysis

Summary: The Assembly Select Committee on Regulatory Authority held its first hearing to examine how California’s regulatory framework affects housing production, affordability, and timelines. Chair Pacheco and Assemblymember Haney framed the discussion around the state’s housing shortage and the need to reduce costs while maintaining environmental, safety, and community protections. The first panel featured housing experts and industry representatives who argued that state regulations, code complexity, utility constraints, and agency review processes add substantial cost and delay to development. Bill Fulton described overlapping state and local land-use authorities and the tension among housing, coastal protection, climate, and wildfire goals. CBIA’s Chris Ochoa and California Apartment Association representative Bob Raymer said building codes, energy mandates, and agency processes have materially increased per-home costs, and they urged more centralized affordability analysis and greater scrutiny of regulatory impacts. The Bay Area Council’s Louis Marante called for a statewide cost target for housing and stronger timelines and accountability for state agency reviews. The second panel brought in state agencies to explain their roles. HCD said its housing element enforcement, streamlining laws, and technical assistance have helped increase production, shorten entitlement timelines, and improve compliance by local governments. CARB said SB 375 is a planning law that does not directly regulate land use, and argued that regional housing assumptions in sustainable communities strategies are not being fully implemented on the ground. The Coastal Commission said it works with local governments to balance coastal protection, sea-level-rise risk, and housing, and noted recent guidance and pilot efforts to streamline housing approvals in the coastal zone. The Energy Commission said its building energy standards are designed to be cost-effective and save consumers money over time, though they can add some design and documentation complexity. Fish and Wildlife and DTSC both emphasized early engagement and collaboration to reduce delays while protecting natural resources and public health; DTSC said it is refining vapor intrusion guidance and using brownfield grants to support redevelopment. The State Water Resources Control Board said it uses general orders and basin planning to provide predictable permitting while balancing water quality, water rights, and housing needs, and noted billions in grants and loans for water infrastructure and site remediation that can support housing affordability. In response to questions from Assemblymember Haney, several agencies described ongoing coordination across departments, including regular meetings among HCD, CARB, the Coastal Commission, and transportation agencies, as well as broader interagency efforts to reduce redundancies and identify pinch points in project delivery. No formal votes or legislative actions were taken during the hearing; the main outcome was informational testimony and discussion of possible future reforms to improve coordination, predictability, and affordability in state regulatory processes.