Transcript Highlights:

• Supported payments to administer outside of the contract structure.
• However, the single rate structure is a little different. This is the stage we are now in.
• ... ...is established under the single rate structure are important to have.
• And where is the balance do you believe in terms of balancing what we know... ...are some structural
• So we continue to strongly oppose the IHSS cost shift, which undermines the existing fiscal structure

Summary: The Assembly Budget Subcommittee on Human Services held a hearing on the Governor’s May Revision, with no votes taken. The first major topic was child care and early education, where the Department of Social Services and Department of Finance outlined proposed changes to absorb federal Child Care and Development Fund and Proposition 64 revenue reductions, shift some funding between child care programs, end funding for prospective pay implementation now that the federal requirement has been rescinded, adjust the alternative payment administration structure, and fund child care infrastructure grants and a Low-Income Investment Fund contract closeout. The Legislative Analyst’s Office said the budget makes progress on the structural deficit but recommended maintaining the administration’s solution level, making reserve deposits, and avoiding new ongoing commitments; it also raised concerns about shifting reductions to the California Alternative Payment Program and about the proposed administrative-rate change. Committee members strongly criticized the proposed loss of child care slots and said they would oppose eliminating those slots, while also expressing support for child care as essential infrastructure. The committee then reviewed California State Preschool Program proposals. Finance and CDE described reductions to the preschool COLA from 2.41% to 2.01%, removal of prospective pay funding, and increases for the QRIS block grant, audit support, and rate reform implementation. Trailer bill language would codify age-based rate categories, inclusion-rate documentation, family fee collection rules, portability, and excused absences. CDE supported the QRIS increase and some attendance and family-fee changes, but warned that aligning three- and four-year-old rates could reduce support for three-year-olds and that the budget does not fully cover enrollment growth. Members also questioned whether the preschool and child care slot reductions should be reallocated rather than terminated, and the administration said the reductions were intended to reflect current utilization and avoid harm to currently enrolled families. The hearing then moved to CalFresh and nutrition programs. CDSS said the May Revision includes a one-time CalFood augmentation, funding to cover federal SNAP administrative cost-share pressures, and additional staffing and technical assistance to implement HR 1 changes, including the able-bodied adults without dependents time limit and new non-citizen eligibility rules. The department estimated HR 1 could cut CalFresh funding by $2.3 billion to $3.7 billion annually and affect about 500,000 people, with roughly 806,000 adults potentially subject to the time limit and about 34,000 non-citizens expected to lose eligibility once fully implemented. Members pressed for stronger harm mitigation, including a $98 million backfill to protect families from losing food benefits, and raised concerns about county workload and the “chilling effect” on immigrant participation. The final portion of the transcript began the IHSS presentation, noting a revised budget of $33.7 billion total funds and $12.8 billion General Fund, with proposed reductions tied to Medi-Cal asset-limit changes and other federal conformity items.

Transcript Highlights:

• </c> it wasn't it didn't have the structure it wasn't it didn't have the structure of<01:23:37.600><c
• </c> structure. So, so excuse me. structure. So, so excuse me.
• </c> superintendent under the new structure. superintendent under the new structure.
• </c><02:02:46.400><c> section</c> in the structure section in the structure section &gt;&gt; or<02:02
• </c> paragraph to go into that structure paragraph to go into that structure section.<02:04:04.800><c

Summary: The meeting focused on reviewing and amending draft minutes and then discussing a draft report on SAU consolidation and school administration efficiency. Members first corrected a disputed statement in the minutes about who starts charter schools, and agreed to mark it as disputed. They also noted a donation figure mentioned in the meeting but not reflected in the notes, and then approved the minutes as amended. The committee then reviewed supporting materials, including a Census Bureau education spending table and a 1993 report on eliminating SAUs. The chair argued New Hampshire ranks very high in administrative spending and used that as evidence for reducing administrative costs. Other members pushed back, noting that education costs are largely borne locally and that the committee should stay focused on its charge. Several members also objected to characterizations of SAU boards and to relying heavily on an old report or on the School District Governance Association’s proposal. The draft report itself drew repeated edits. Members objected to language suggesting the testimony from associations was simply that change was not needed, and proposed more neutral wording about concerns over the impacts of changes. There was also disagreement over a proposed model in which a county-level school administrator would be elected; some members said that would be inappropriate and premature, while others argued the committee had not yet fully developed a consolidation model. The discussion ended with a call from some members for more time and for a future joint legislative committee to continue refining any proposal before legislation is introduced.

Transcript Highlights:

• I think it's that you're urging us to act on the structural reform piece.
• I think it's, you're urging us to act on the structural reform piece.
• It, because of that, I think, had some structural sort of hurdles because of the trust issues.
• And so the way that the bill is structured is that allows parties to continue to file a claim.
• And I think it is a big disaster that we were not able to come up with that structural reform.

Summary: The Assembly Committee on Utilities and Energy held an informational hearing on wildfire issues in SB 492, with Senator Becker presenting the bill as a follow-on to the SB 254 wildfire report. Becker said the measure is intended to center wildfire survivors through a faster claims-payment process, block hedge funds and private equity from profiting off wildfire-related claims, reduce or eliminate executive bonuses after utility-caused fires, improve wildfire risk data sharing through a statewide data commons, and strengthen community wildfire preparedness planning. TURN supported the bill as an important first step, emphasizing priority for victims, limits on third-party claims, and community hardening. Several witnesses and committee members raised concerns that the bill did not go far enough on structural reform and could worsen utility financial stability, borrowing costs, rates, and jobs. Representatives of utility workers warned that higher financing costs and possible downgrades could lead to major job losses, reduced utility investment, and even bankruptcy risks. The California Building Industry Association argued the bill could slow utility infrastructure work needed for housing and clean-energy development. Other members questioned whether the fast-pay system would truly help survivors, whether it should be mandatory, how deadlines and litigation stays would work, and how executive compensation reductions would be implemented. Becker and staff responded that the bill preserves the right to sue while requiring a fast-pay application, shortens timelines compared with prior utility programs, and uses an independent process. They also argued the estimated rate impacts were being overstated and that the bill still leaves room for additional affordability and structural reforms in future legislation. No vote was taken; the chair adjourned the hearing early to return to floor session, and public comment was directed to the committee website.

Transcript Highlights:

• So that project actually required a fair amount of steel girders to go under the structure, not only
• The roof structure is different. The lighting is different.
• It serves as a museum now, but the DMS maintains the physical structure of the building.
• It also included, as you see the cupola there, some structural repairs inside that part of the structure
• Capitol HVAC, so the heating... ...of the structure.

Summary: The State Administration Budget Subcommittee met to receive an overview and tour of Capitol complex construction projects funded through the Department of Management Services (DMS). Deputy Secretary Tom Berger gave a historical and project-by-project presentation on the Capitol campus, explaining the evolution of the historic Capitol and the current tower complex, and describing major ongoing work including the Waller Park west entry/ADA and waterproofing project, the east entry security screening area, Cabinet meeting room modernization, historic Capitol re-roofing, the large Capitol HVAC replacement, window replacement, Memorial Park improvements, the Holocaust Memorial, the North Loading Zone, and Knott Plaza upgrades. He noted that the Capitol windows and HVAC work are intended to address aging systems and improve resilience, security, and accessibility, and said the broader Capitol window project will continue over several years. Members asked questions about the African-American memorial, the old bank/archives building with water damage, the roofing material and expected lifespan, the legal definition of the Capitol complex, and the history of early legislative meetings in Pensacola and St. Augustine. Berger said the African-American memorial base is built and the installation should be completed in March or April, while the archives building is owned and managed by the Department of State. He also explained that the roof uses a slate-like material designed for a 50-year life cycle, though major storms could still damage it, and clarified that the Capitol complex can be defined differently in statute versus operationally. Chair Lopez and other members requested follow-up information, including a rendering of the African-American memorial and a table summarizing the Capitol investments and when the facilities were last updated, so members can better explain the spending to constituents. Berger said he would provide the requested information, and the committee then concluded the presentation and proceeded to the tour.

Transcript Highlights:

• This policy will allow DWC to modernize and structure... Of these annually.
• So my point is there's some structure to it that makes it significant.
• Yes, we're trying to put some kind of structure in place to be able to really effectively.
• So it's a new structure, Senator. We're very clear it's a new structure.
• I guess the question is why do they need to have the new structure?

Bills: HB111

Committee: Senate Business & Commerce

Summary: The committee heard a long series of House bills, with most measures laid out by Senate sponsors and then left pending after brief public testimony. Early bills focused on construction and licensing issues, including HB 305 on prompt payment for public construction audits, HB 5093 on restoring public access to notary contact information, HB 2037 on updating landlord-tenant repair and security deposit rules, HB 4214 on a centralized public information request contact database, and HB 5435 exempting higher education institutions from a 90-day notice requirement for certain public-private partnership projects. Testimony was generally supportive on these bills, and no votes were taken; each was left pending. The committee also considered several transparency and regulatory bills. HB 111 would expand the Public Information Act to certain nonprofit state associations and narrow some attorney-client and working-paper exceptions, with supporters arguing it would improve oversight of public funds and critics questioning the scope and thresholds. HB 5129 would protect occupational license holders’ personal identifying information from disclosure without consent, HB 4350 would allow peace officers to redact personal information from online real property records, HB 4748 would authorize multiple-award state purchasing contracts, and HB 4765 would clean up code enforcement officer licensing rules. HB 4134 would allow motor vehicle creditors to charge limited fees for electronic payment options while requiring a free alternative, and HB 1043 would direct a study of blockchain-based property title records; both drew testimony, with some concern about the practical effects and vendor implications of the blockchain study. Several bills addressed insurance, workforce, and digital-asset regulation. HB 3520 would reduce the insurance coverage required for transportation network companies during the period when a driver is en route to pick up a passenger, drawing support from Texans for Lawsuit Reform and opposition from trial lawyers who argued the higher coverage better protects the public. HB 3320 would create a self-insurance pool for religious institutions, with TDI explaining it would still be regulated but operate under a special statutory framework. HB 4233 would modernize rules for digital asset service providers by removing certain auditor-access requirements and updating reporting and licensing provisions. HB 3923 would reduce bachelor’s-degree requirements for some state jobs, though Every Texan argued low pay, not degree requirements, is the main driver of turnover. HB 4518 would create a legal structure for decentralized unincorporated nonprofit associations tied to blockchain governance; business law experts opposed it as unnecessary and potentially risky, while crypto advocates supported it. Finally, HB 1803 would join an interstate compact for dentists and dental hygienists, with supporters citing workforce shortages and opponents saying Texas already licenses quickly and that the compact could weaken state oversight. Throughout the hearing, the committee repeatedly closed testimony and left bills pending, and a quorum was eventually established before later items were heard.

Transcript Highlights:

• Our statute talks about insured value of the structure.
• building code had wind-driven structural damage.
• For example, roof covers did not perform as well as the structures themselves.
• building code had wind-driven structural damage.
• So that's currently the way we are structured. So that's currently the way we are structured.

Committee: Senate Banking and Insurance

Summary: The Banking and Insurance Committee heard a series of presentations focused on mitigation, flood and wind resilience, and insurance discounts. Kevin Guthrie of the Florida Division of Emergency Management outlined several funding streams for mitigation, including federal Hazard Mitigation Grant Program dollars, BRIC grants, flood mitigation assistance, and the state hurricane loss mitigation program. He emphasized the new Elevate Florida initiative, which will use about $400 million initially to elevate or reconstruct flood-prone homes, starting with National Flood Insurance Program properties and severe repetitive-loss homes, with no current per-home cap. Guthrie said the state will contract directly with licensed vendors and aims to reduce future flood losses, lower insurance costs, and keep properties on the tax rolls rather than relying on buyouts. Insurance Commissioner Mike Yaworski described Florida’s windstorm mitigation discount program, explaining that the 1802 inspection form is used to assess a home’s overall “envelope” and determine statutory discounts. He said the office is updating the program based on a new wind loss study, with likely changes including greater recognition of roof types such as metal roofs and possible territorial risk adjustments. He also said the Legislature now requires the office to revisit the study every five years. Stephen Fielder of the Department of Financial Services reported on My Safe Florida Home, noting that the program offers inspections and grants for roof and opening protections, has completed more than 100,000 inspections, and has reimbursed hundreds of millions of dollars. He said the department has validated its discount calculations with insurers and that the program is intended to help homeowners reduce premiums through verified mitigation work. Michael Newman of the Insurance Institute for Business and Home Safety said Florida’s building code is nationally leading and that post-Ian surveys found no wind-driven structural damage in buildings built after adoption of the code. He argued that mitigation should be treated as a system, not isolated upgrades, and suggested adding Fortified designation to the state’s mitigation form to better document verified resilience improvements. Bill Truex, a county commissioner and builder, stressed the need to educate homeowners about floodproofing and roof choices, citing examples where flood panels prevented damage and noting that asphalt shingles often do not last as long in Florida as their marketing suggests. In panel discussion, senators asked about program eligibility, outreach to elderly and digitally challenged residents, contractor vetting, roof-life disclosures, and whether flood insurance should be more broadly required. Officials said outreach will include call centers and in-person assistance, and several participants urged better consumer disclosure and more data-driven guidance on roof and mitigation choices.

Transcript Highlights:

• That will go a long way towards those. ...are thoroughly trained in structured literacy.
• With increasing federal uncertainty, this gives New Mexico a durable state-level structure to protect
• Yet historically, special education has lacked the permanent cabinet-level structure that it needs.
• Yet historically, special education has lacked the permanent cabinet level structure that it needs.
• This structure strengthens the state's ability to monitor and support compliance, provide consistent

Bills: SB64 , SB19 , SB44 , SB83 , HB40 , HB100 , HJR1 , SB64 , SB19 , SB44 , SB83

Committees: Senate Senate Education , Senate House Education

Keywords: special education, office of special education, deputy secretary, public education department, IEP, individualized education program, students with disabilities, IDEA, Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, dyslexia, dyslexia screening, structured literacy, reading intervention, multilayered system of supports, MTSS, student assistance team, free appropriate public education, FAPE, special education compliance, charter schools

Transcript Highlights:

• Fragmentation describes how systems are structured.
• One describes a structure, the other describes a consequence.
• This is the work ahead, not just improving access with existing structures, but examining how those structures
• This is the work ahead, not just improving access with existing structures, but examining how those structures
• These structural barriers do not disappear with age.

Transcript Highlights:

• In addition, the cost of care plus payment structure is simple and consistent across all providers that
• Defining and gaining feedback about single-rate structure policies for when that time comes.
• policies, such as how the rate structure should vary based on a child's age, on time categories, on
• I think the challenge... ...the challenge is that the structure of how the rates were negotiated makes
• That is the discussion that continues to go forward, even under a permissive structure.

Transcript Highlights:

• because I understand there's a structural deficit that the governor wants to solve for.
• And as a result of this 90-10 structure, kind of being more of a penalty structure, it makes qualification
• While structure is important, many grievances are urgent and cannot wait.
• Now, while structure is important, many grievances are urgent and cannot wait.
• We think these will improve the governance structure that is trying to be created under this.

Summary: The Assembly Budget Subcommittee on Human Services heard testimony on Department of Developmental Services (DDS) and related budget and trailer bill proposals, with a major focus on the impacts of H.R. 1 on people with intellectual and developmental disabilities (IDD). DDS and the Department of Social Services (DSS) said H.R. 1 could affect Medi-Cal and CalFresh access, but that people with disabilities and caregivers are exempt from the work requirements; the administration is working on data matching and automation through the statewide eligibility system to identify exemptions, with June 1, 2026 as the implementation date for CalFresh changes. Witnesses and advocates warned that any loss of Medi-Cal could create fiscal pressure on regional centers and households, while public commenters described the real-life consequences of losing services. Committee members repeatedly expressed concern about cost shifts to counties and asked for harm-mitigation strategies before the May Revision. The committee also reviewed the governor’s IHSS-related proposals. DSS said the budget would set a baseline for authorized hours, align IHSS disenrollment/reinstatement with Medi-Cal eligibility processes, and eliminate the IHSS backup provider system, while emphasizing that individual service hours would still be based on assessed need. DDS said if a person loses IHSS or Medi-Cal, regional centers may have to step in as payer of last resort for some services, potentially at higher state cost. Members and the Legislative Analyst’s Office questioned whether counties could absorb the proposed shifts without reducing services, and asked for more detail on implementation, data quality controls, and how regional centers could help families navigate disruptions. A separate trailer bill on DDS rate reform and the Quality Incentive Program drew mixed reactions. DDS proposed extending a contract exemption and delaying final rate reform regulations to 2030, saying the changes are budget-neutral and needed for implementation. DDS reported that about 81% of providers had completed the current Quality Incentive Program requirements, but providers and advocates argued the 90-10 structure can function like a penalty and may destabilize services if providers lose 10% of funding. Committee members asked for clearer assistance to providers, possible flexibility for good-faith efforts, and a redlined version of the language before the May Revision. The committee also heard DDS’s proposed trailer bill on regional center governance and provider capacity. DDS said the language would consolidate regional center contracts and performance measures, strengthen board training and oversight, require consumer advisory committees, expand independent legal support, raise the threshold for board approval of contracts, and remove barriers such as physical-office requirements and duplicate vendorization. DDS said the goal is to improve accountability and efficiency while preserving person-centered services, and members indicated they wanted further refinement and stakeholder input before moving forward.

Transcript Highlights:

• This draft reflects the creation of a committee to study during the next interim the feasibility, structure
• The other thing is that this is the big study of the structure of the court, the fiscal impact, those
• We're talking about the big umbrella structure of whether or not a family court is feasible and what
• Because if you put different rules in place, it may not fit the structure.
• And now you've got incorrect structure.

Committee: Joint Child Custody Review Task Force

Summary: The Child Custody Review Task Force met with a quorum, approved the prior minutes, and then took up draft legislation to create a future interim committee to study the feasibility of a family court in North Dakota. Beth outlined the draft’s purpose, proposed 15-member membership, and the study topics, including constitutional authority, court structure, jurisdiction, fiscal impact, implementation, and possible phased-in approaches. Members discussed committee composition at length, ultimately agreeing to keep the committee at 15 by reducing legislative members from eight to six, adding two judges from different judicial districts, two family law section members with rural/urban representation, one parent subject to a custody order, and a clerk of court representative; the self-help, mental health, and domestic violence positions were debated, with domestic violence advocacy retained and some other positions removed or replaced. The committee also agreed to include analysis of state and local fiscal impacts and efficiencies, and to keep the provision on procedural rules in the draft. The revised draft was approved and recommended to Legislative Management, with one recorded no vote from Judge Hovey after the fact. The committee then turned to a second draft dealing with mandatory participation in a family transition program in contested parental-rights cases. Members first clarified that the term should be changed to a more general “parenting education course,” rather than a named private program, and discussed whether the bill should also require education about court process and family-law procedures. Some members argued the bill should specify content such as co-parenting, parental alienation, harassment, disorderly conduct, removal of a child from the jurisdiction, and contempt consequences, while others objected that the proposal was too vague, could impose costs without clear limits or waivers, and might amount to compelled legal advice or an undefined private program. Several members said the bill needed more specificity before it could be presented, and the discussion became increasingly divided over whether to keep the draft at all. The transcript ends amid that debate, with no final action yet taken on the second draft.

Transcript Highlights:

• While most universities are growing, a subset, primarily in Northern California, continues to face structural
• This is a structured system-wide assessment of fiscal risk and institutional performance.
• Our Strategic Shared Initiatives Program is now to address our cost structures.
• So I think it is embedded now into the structure of the entire system.
• deficit, I don't think that... ...needs to do a lot to address their structural deficit.

Transcript Highlights:

• It is a structurally deficient bridge.
• :46.400><c> are</c><00:21:46.559><c> these</c> how structurally efficient are these how structurally
• </c><00:22:33.039><c> So</c> considered structurally deficient.
• So considered structurally deficient.
• </c><00:23:00.720><c> There's</c> structurally deficient list. There's structurally deficient list.

Committee: House Public Works and Highways

Transcript Highlights:

• I'm going to build on the comments we made in our committee hearing last week on the overall structure
• Do you want the funding to go deep and have fewer structures that are protected but have more of them
• If we wanted to prioritize structure risk mitigation as compared to watershed.
• And you or anybody else that wants to, the proximity to the structure that, the structures that we're
• Many buildings are old and inefficient, lacking operational and structural efficiencies.

Transcript Highlights:

• But matching that fixed cost structure.
• So the the higher cost structure.
• Uh so the super rural is the structure.
• Any questions on the structure of the bill?
• on the structure of the bill?

Bills: HB0004

Committee: House Labor, Health & Social Services

Transcript Highlights:

• Uh, we've reduced that projected structural imbalance by 45% in this first year, meaning we don't have
• Um, all of those things and in a budget situation where we had some structural issues that needed to
• </c> to an agreement on is that structural to an agreement on is that structural imbalance<00:02:20.800
• </c> situation where we had some structural situation where we had some structural issues<00:03:15.920
• </c> reduction in the structural imbalance. reduction in the structural imbalance.

Transcript Highlights:

• We have a structural imbalance.
• We've got a massive structural deficit.
• </c> And we do need to fix the structural And we do need to fix the structural part<01:18:09.120><c>
• </c><01:39:45.680><c> imbalance</c> the structural imbalance the structural imbalance now,<01:39:48.360
• </c> structurally to fix the imbalance. structurally to fix the imbalance.

Bills: HF4252

Committee: House Higher Education Finance and Policy

Keywords: higher education, student aid, financial aid, grant programs, scholarships, Office of Higher Education, Minnesota State, University of Minnesota, community college, technical college, postsecondary institution, college affordability, student fees, athletic facilities, competitive athletics, developmental education, remedial courses, pregnant students, parenting students, priority registration

Transcript Highlights:

• We're going to walk through the structure of the document first, and then we'll go down the sheet row
• That's the structure of the document, just so you all have that context.
• But I'm telling you, we've got a structure already ready to go.
• of the current programmatic structure of residencies.
• In addition to this, I'll start with page three, which talks about structured literacy.

Transcript Highlights:

• So what this means is that CDCR's budget has a structural shortfall, or it appears to.
• And then moving to our comments and recommendations finally on the underlying issue, this structural
• So I just want to acknowledge that the department and the administration are aware of the structure.
• So I just want to acknowledge that the department and the administration are aware of the structure.
• I just want to acknowledge that the department and the administration are aware of the structural budget

Summary: The Assembly Budget Subcommittee No. 6 on Public Safety heard updates on CDCR’s population projections and the preliminary fiscal impacts of Proposition 36. CDCR said its fall 2025 projections show continued declines in the institution and parole populations through June 2030, while noting Prop. 36 admissions are increasing but remain uncertain. The LAO said the administration’s Prop. 36 estimates may be somewhat low because they were based on only six months of implementation data, and the Department of Finance agreed the methodology is still developing. Committee members asked about the offenses driving admissions and the sentence-length impacts, and CDCR identified the main qualifying offenses and enhancements it is tracking. No votes were taken. The committee then discussed CDCR’s request for $91 million ongoing for lump-sum leave cashouts for correctional officers and nurses. CDCR said vacancy reductions and prison closures have reduced the salary savings historically used to cover these costs. The LAO supported the funding only on a limited-term basis and urged more oversight and reporting on CDCR’s structural shortfall, while the Department of Finance argued ongoing funding is needed because leave liabilities are mandatory and salary savings are less stable. Members raised concerns about transparency, asked about leave buyback practices and accrued leave balances, and requested more information before the May Revision. Members also heard CDCR’s proposals for $10 million for the final two statewide video surveillance projects and $15.2 million for Fire Watch coverage and related fire alarm work. The LAO supported the Fire Watch request as a one-time health and safety cost, while CDCR explained the aging prison infrastructure and the need for interim safety measures while longer-term replacement planning is developed. The committee then reviewed CDCR’s proposal to close the California Rehabilitation Center, which would produce a net General Fund reduction of $99.6 million in 2026-27 and ongoing savings of more than $150 million starting in 2027-28. CDCR said the closure is driven by sustained population declines and will include retention and realignment funding; the LAO recommended approval. Public comment focused on county funding for Prop. 36 implementation, opposition to using Prop. 36 as a reason to keep prisons open, and support for community-based rehabilitation programs. The hearing adjourned without any votes.

Transcript Highlights:

• We are only asking for a structured mechanism for employees in the county to come together, and this
• Currently, Texas law provides two distinct structures for county. procurement.
• Under this structure, the Agent would be appointed by and directly accountable to the Commissioner's
• The counties with flexibility to choose the governance structure best suited to their needs.
• Again, counties such as Dallas and Denton have already adopted a similar structure.

Bills: HB1597 , HB2364 , HB2437 , HB3205 , HB3253 , HB3310 , HB3648 , HB3906 , HB4259 , HB5645

Committee: House S/C on County & Regional Government

Keywords: county jailer, jail training, veterans, Texas Veterans Commission, Texas Commission on Law Enforcement, TCOLE, criminal justice system, county jail, law enforcement training, mental health training, jail standards, correctional officers, veteran services, veteran interaction, occupations code, jailer licensing, parking, county courthouse, infrastructure, local government